View Single Post
  #22  
Old 08-24-2009, 09:54 PM
alien21010 alien21010 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
No dowser has been able to prove their abilities in an objective, blinded attempt and it's been tried many times.
I never said that they had. AFAIK, there have never been any double blind studies comparing the effectiveness of geophysics to that of dowsing.

Quote:
The JREF has conducted tests where they put 10 pipes underground and have a mechanism for switching which one the water is going through. No one has ever done better than chance.
I am not a proponent of dowsing by any means, but dowsers would be right to neglect this kind of study, as it fails to reproduce ANY of the conditions that they claim success in.

One of the only scientific studies that I can find on dowsing, is available at:
http://www.jse.com/betz_toc.html (search for Dowsing),
(summary available at http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...h/1281661.html). According to them, dowsing was wildly successful during the course of their research, much more so than would be expected. They also tried experiments similar to those carried out by JREF and found that dowsing under those conditions resulted in poor results. Could there be something else at play here? I do not know, but I do know that there is quite simply a tremendous lack of knowledge on the subject.

I would like to note that I am not sure what, if any, scientific legitimacy the above mentioned organization has. They are basically the only ones who have done any work in the field with dowsing and published it.

Quote:
Come on, really, a better record? Do you have any sort of evidence or cite?

Dowsing is entirely bullshit. A dowser may be able to legitimately find what they're looking for, but it's only because they know where it is through some observational method and then either lie or fool themselves with the ideomotor effect.

Or you can just have open ended criteria. For instance, I read about a contractor who would on his job dowse for various man made objects. He claimed that the majority of time, when his dowsing tool indicated an area, it was within 10 feet (IIRC) of an electrical line, or water line, or sewage line, or something. Basically anything. But if you just walk around a random construction zone and stop in random places, you're likely to be within 10 feet of something man made.
I agree that dowsers are most likely using substantial knowledge regarding the geology and/or other markers that indicate the presence of objects (surprisingly these are very common). However, anecdotal evidence is very strongly in the favor of dowsing. See the link below (trained geophysicists using dowsing?!):

http://www.virginiagroundwater.com/i...d=22&Itemid=55


While it makes perfect sense to disregard dowsing at face value, the simple answer is that there is not enough scientific evidence to make a judgment either way. However, I suspect that we will find that dowsing has no legitimate basis in the near future.