ZRX61
Well-known member
I needed to find the water line.And you accept that as proof?
Doc.
I dowsed
I found it
Case closed.
Last edited:
I needed to find the water line.And you accept that as proof?
Doc.
It's not a *belief*, you're thinking of religion or superstition. Dowsing works, but it does frighten some people. My late father in law accused me of being a satan worshipper over it.I know where my well is and I know where the pipe enters the house the barn and the shop pipe cost money as well as back hoes so I am reasonably sure the pipe doesn't head for the back forty make three figure 8s then head to the house. What is shocking is how many people believe in it.
It's not a *belief*, you're thinking of religion or superstition.
- Dowsing studies from the early 20th century were examined by geologist John Walter Gregory in a report for the Smithsonian Institution. Gregory concluded that the results were a matter of chance or explained by observations from ground surface clues.[52][53]
- Geologist W. A. MacFadyen tested three dowsers during 1943–1944 in Algeria. The results were entirely negative.[54]
- A 1948 study in New Zealand by P. A. Ongley tested 75 dowsers' ability to detect water. None of them was more reliable than chance. According to Ongley "not one showed the slightest accuracy."[55]
- Archaeometrist Martin Aitken tested British dowser P. A. Raine in 1959. Raine failed to dowse the location of a buried kiln that had been identified by a magnetometer.[56][57]
- In 1971, dowsing experiments were organized by British engineer R. A. Foulkes on behalf of the Ministry of Defence. The results were "no more reliable than a series of guesses".[58]
- Physicists John Taylor and Eduardo Balanovski reported in 1978 a series of experiments they conducted that searched for unusual electromagnetic fields emitted by dowsing subjects, they did not detect any.[59]
- A 1979 review by Evon Z. Vogt and Ray Hyman examined many controlled studies of dowsing for water, and found that none of them showed better than chance results.[6]
- Three British academics Richard N Bailey, Eric Cambridge and H. Denis Briggs carried out dowsing experiments at the grounds of various churches. They reported successful results in their book Dowsing and Church Archaeology (1988).[60] Their experiments were critically examined by archaeologist Martijn Van Leusen who suggested they were badly designed and the authors had redefined the test parameters on what was classified as a "hit" or "miss" to obtain positive results.[60]
- A 2006 study of grave dowsing in Iowa reviewed 14 published studies and determined that none of them correctly predicted the location of human burials, and simple scientific experiments demonstrated that the fundamental principles commonly used to explain grave dowsing were incorrect.[61]
- A randomized double-blind trial in 2012 was carried out to determine whether homeopaths were able to distinguish between Bryonia and placebo by use of a dowsing method. The results were negative.[62]
While I kind of agree with you, but how do you explain the successful finds by dowsing. As I said before, I didn't believe in this till I tried it. And it worked every time. I'm still on the fence weather it is my mind doing it somehow, or some kind of magnetic type of force. But it is interesting.-It's not? It supposedly works by some unexplained and unknowable means, can't be tested in the lab, and even the practitioners can't agree on how it works, why it works, what it can find or what tools are used to do it.
That's not a religion or superstition?
From Wikipedia:
I repeat: Not one successful test. Plenty of successful demonstrations of a parlor trick, yes, as well evidenced here, but just as a magician can't pull a rabbit out of an actually empty hat under proper test conditions, said parlor trick cannot be done successfully in the lab.
Doc.
While I kind of agree with you, but how do you explain the successful finds by dowsing.
You haven't, so you don't believe it. That's your right.
I work for one as well and our locator do not cost anything close to that. Also the quote true locator equipment you can purchase does not have a 100% accuracy rate. I've had to repair a lot of damage from inaccurate locates.I worked for a utility and we never had a locator that cost $20,000.
Yup. Been tested under rigorous scientific conditions and it's no different than a Ouaji board. The fact is, the OP likely had a good clue as to where the pipe was already. Probably knew where it came into the house and maybe it ran perpendicular to the street or he had seen a manhole or where the cutoff valve was even if he didn't remember it. Our brains are a bunch of very sophisticated interconnected neural network processor modules. They are good at recognizing patterns and drawing inferences and connections. Sometimes we have that "eureka" moment and realize "oh,yea the pipe must run between the curb valve and where I see it enter the house in the basement." and pat themselves on the back for their clever deductive reasoning. Others just know that it must be there and think nothing of it, because it's "obvious". Still others get out a dowsing rod and go through some mumbo jumbo ritual. But in the end it's really no different that stepping back and thinking about if for a few minutes and having that "eureka" moment. Your brain did the same thing.... You people can't be serious.
No, dowsing does not work. The proof of that is that the utility companies use a $20,000 tool for detecting pipes, lines and wires. You think they'd buy one of those if you could pay an apprentice $15 an hour to use a couple bent coathangers?
Yes, I'm quite sure many of you have experienced "successful" trials, and will argue that point endlessly.
But the fact is, James Randi offered a million dollars to anyone who could demonstrate the ability under test conditions. They tested something like a thousand applicants, over the course of some thirty years- tests that that doswers themselves agreed to beforehand, and who, prior to the test, had successfully 'detected' samples of water, pipes or wires.
Not one of them claimed the prize. Many didn't even reach the level of statistical probability- that is, a certain number of 'correct' results that would be expected if a person was just guessing blindly.
And yes, I've heard every single one of the explanations as to why the dowser can do it easily in grandma's backyard, but couldn't when properly tested. And they're all horseshit.
It's very much like the old "car battery on concrete" thing- it's utter ****, but people keep believing it because it's an easy-to-do parlor trick (look up the ideomotor effect) and people want to believe it just as they want to believe in the 'power of crystals', UFOs, ghosts and other hokum.
Doc.
There are definitely aliensWell hell!!....Now I suppose you guys are gonna tell me there are NO aliens...?
Wait.... your washing machine discharges outside?I had a friend of a friend come to the house to help locate a water line that I had a rough idea where it was. He found it in a different location. I told him he wasn’t even close. He wanted to dig in the spot to see what he was finding. Since my yard is far from nice I let him. Come to find out he had located a washing machine discharge line that I didn’t know was there. I still don’t believe in it.
Of course "science" isn't always right.
Hundreds of years ago, everyone knew the Earth was flat.
I don't understand it, but it was super trippy having the dousing rods move on their own and locate the same spot regardless of the direction I came from.
I accept data from peer-reviewed studies personally.And you accept that as proof?

