You keep saying this, and yet your statements are based on faith, while the opposite view is based on real science with real experiments that can be used to prove it one way or another. I really don't see how a faith-based belief (one that the believer has stated he has no interested in proving) can be used to call a science-based approach 'utter nonsense'.
-- JJ
I used to play with a couple I made when I was very young. They always crossed without fail when approaching a certain line across the kitchen. It was years later that I found out a lead gas pipe crossed along that line. How that worked, I don't know, but I can make a few guesses. Perhaps I knew more than I thought I knew. Perhaps I was somehow detecting something (and crossing the wires myself). Perhaps the orientation of the kitchen had some other effect - I just don't know how many cues I was picking up. What I do know though, is that it could only have been my own hands moving them.
The idea of the rods is that it forms a positive feedback loop at a critical bistable state. What that means in English, is that they are balanced in such a way that they could move either way with very little effort. It is a bit like balancing a ping-pong ball on a razer - it is not very stable, and the slightest breeze with make it fall to one side. The feedback comes in because of the fact that the holder can a) see the rods moving, and b) feel the rods moving. If you see or feel it happening, probably just through random muscle movements, and you believe (even subconsiously) that the movement is positive or significant, then it does not take much further movement to swing them further with your own hands. Once they do swing inward, the balance has shifted, and your arms or wrists twist slightly, just enough to keep them there.
-- JJ
lol! It's magic. Whoooooooo!
The message from "Jason" contains these words:
Look into the eyes, just the eyes, only the eyes......
There's no point in answering them, Tony.
>
Do you feel better having got that off your chest?
You keep spouting on about your lack of faith yet can't prove anything.
Why bother?
I didn't think they were either.
:-)
Mary
How often?
Poor chap, having to mix with the rabble in yours. And mine.
The message from "Mary Fisher" contains these words:
How the hell do I know, but there were blokes in yellow jackets running a thing looking like a lawnmower with a TV screen over the ground near here a few weeks ago. I asked 'em what they were doing - they were looking for the water main for part of the estate (1970s) which they'd lost. They reckoned they were busy pretty much all the time looking for old services and suchlike.
I'm as sceptical as anybody about occult-type phenomena - really.
For many years I've been involved as a trustee in the preservation of a waterworks at
I know. They are all making themselves at home in my kill file.
I wonder how it was that, on a site that was about 140 metres by 40 metres, my hands "knew" to cross the rods *exactly* over where the buried services were located, but *nowhere else*? It could only have been my imagination.
;-)
Which one was that? Burdon?
I found it odd that it rose well inside the building, rather than adjacent to the exterior wall. Where did it come into the building? how did it get across the site?
You've d> such things aren't provable in "scientific" tests (which really means
they aren't provable at all).
Nonsense, it may simply indicate you've chosen the wrong scientific model.
Ger> A lot of dowsing (like in Tony Polson's case) is down to luck. The rest
of it is down to certainty.
You seem to know an awful lot more than "science" can provide...
Ger> Mary, I saw this article and thought of you:
...And when you descend to cheap gibes one suspects you are aware of the weakness of your position.
It would be really interesting to have a serious discussion of dowsing; it's a pity that those who oppose the idea here seem to have such a poor grasp of the concept of scientific method. Just in case anyone would like to provide thoughtful comments I've changed the subject to help the s/n ratio.
Does dowsing only work when you actually hold the rods in your hands? Would it still work if you rigged up some sort of holder? Imagine you are holding a couple of tubes with the dowsing rods sitting in them (able to rotate freely). Would that work?
If the answer is "yes" to the first question and "no" to the second, there might *possibly* be something to it. I don't have any problem accepting the subconscious might be able to transmit electrical impulses to the muscles of the hands causing rods to move.
If the answer to the second question is "yes" then all I can say in response is "woof".
We're very special people.
Mary
Nice site - and what a beautiful building! It's now on my list of Places to Visit.
It's quite surprising how many people do have their first experience of dowsing 'for fun' or similar reasons - even scepticism. Suddenly it becomes a wonder ...
Mary
>I haven't seen any posts from Mr Christ so he can't exist.
Mary
It's a pity that those who believe in dowsing have no grasp at all of scientific method and prefer to rely on anecdote and belief, absent of evidence.
Here's a clue, those who propose that dowsing works need to provide evidence to support their claim. It is not a case of a "dowsing works unless proven not to work".
If you could produce some credible evidence that dowsing works, I'll pay it attention. If you had the slightest clue about scientific method, I'd pay you some attention. But a blanket claim that those stating that there is no credible basis for dowsing to work know nothing about scientific method, is the sound of an empty vessel making a loud noise.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.