Dowsing on photos - Test

[zut]

@RJKUgly

Uncertain, do you mean it would be best if the photographs were all taken when the subjects were of a similar age, regardless of their age now? For example, all the pictures would be high school yearbook photos, even if some were recent and some graduated high school 40 years ago? Or do we simply make sure that the apparent age in the picture of each person now dead is matched by the apparent age in the picture of a person still living, even if some of the pictures are of young people and some are of old people?

Not speaking for Uncertain, but I think the point here is that it’s possible to guess a person’s present age by picking up cues from the apparent age of the photograph and/or the apparent age of the person in the photograph (and thus their chances of being alive). A best-case scenario would be to have a suite of photographs all taken at the same time, whose subjects are the same age–a 1950 yearbook, for example, would be ideal.

Failing that, there should be some other way of systematically eliminating any bias due to apparent ages. One way would be to pair photos, so that each photo in a pair is taken at roughly the same time, and of people roughly the same age, and one photo in each pair is “alive” and one is “dead.”

@RJKUgly

And what should be the mix of dead/alive? If I understood some of the discussion in the previous thread, it shouldn’t matter if pramanujan knows how many are dead and how many are alive in each batch as long as we account for that in determining whether he has scored above chance or not.

It shouldn’t matter, but I think the method of picking the mix should be explicitly stated up front. Either have a set number of people in each catagory, or randomly pick the number in a pre-arranged way.

@RJKUgly

And again, does anyone know of an easy way to come up pictures that meet the criteria we’ve set? Namely (and please chime in if I’ve missed any requirements):

• They apparent age of the people in the pictures does not give clues
• The current status of the individuals can be reliably determined
• The pictures are not of recognizable celebrities or public figures
• The pictures are not searchable on any internet search engine
• There are no legal implications to using the pictures (i.e. the people pictured are not going to object)

Something like yearbook would be the best, but that relies on some individual to do some substantial research.

As an alternative, we could use paired pictures. If enough people have sets of parents or grandparents where one is alive and one is dead, that would make a nice pair. Except for the fact that women tend to live longer than men…

[JimOfAllTrades]

@zut

Not speaking for Uncertain, but I think the point here is that it’s possible to guess a person’s present age by picking up cues from the apparent age of the photograph and/or the apparent age of the person in the photograph (and thus their chances of being alive).

I definitely agree. That’s why in the first test I sent pictures that were taken in three large groups, one group in the mid 1980s, one group from about 1999, and one group a few years later. They were all color, and I cropped them all down to tight head shots to avoid the backgrounds or clothing from giving clues.

@zut

Something like yearbook would be the best, but that relies on some individual to do some substantial research.

As an alternative, we could use paired pictures. If enough people have sets of parents or grandparents where one is alive and one is dead, that would make a nice pair. Except for the fact that women tend to live longer than men…

I have access to a few yearbooks for various years from the 1950s to 1970s. But as you say, I don’t know a simple way of determining their current status or if they would permit their picture to be used in such a way.

Also, yearbook pictures are pretty small. The quality may be a factor there.

And I never thought about women generally living longer. Perhaps any one group should be all women or all men.

[yoyodyne]

How is the quality of the photo a factor? If the rods are doing it themselves they don’t have eyes. Perhaps if you took the photos and photoshopped an opaque layer over them it would still work.

[SiXSwordS]

@yoyodyne

How is the quality of the photo a factor?

I’ve been wondering the same thing myself. We’ve been told that the power includes being able to use a photo of a known decedent to detect South as the image will demonstrate “negative” energy in all other directions.

That claim seems almost impossible to test, but it should make identifying photos a snap. If unsure on any one photo, just try facing it South and see if it exudes “positive” energy.

So long as you knew which way to face the opaque layer to ensure that the photo was facing South, you could have it in an envelope and expect to be able to detect biostatus.

[JimOfAllTrades]

@yoyodyne

How is the quality of the photo a factor? If the rods are doing it themselves they don’t have eyes. Perhaps if you took the photos and photoshopped an opaque layer over them it would still work.

I don’t why it matters. Actually since I think the movement of the rods is caused by small unconscious movements by the dowser I can see why it would make a difference. If the movements come from the dowser, then how they look will change the dowser’s perception of the picture and possibly the movements.

But I don’t know why pramanujan thinks it matters, or perhaps he does not know. I believe he has said he doesn’t know how or why the rods move.

However, we are trying to test what he claims he can do and he has said it makes a difference. Since the requirement doesn’t seem particularly difficult to meet I can’t see any reason not to supply reasonably clear pictures.

[pramanujan]

Nice to see some good discussions. This really shows that we are working together.

You may select the photos and group them as you like to. My attempts too are to find out if there is any truth in the pattern shown by the rod.

How is the quality of the photo a factor? If the rods are doing it themselves they don’t have eyes. Perhaps if you took the photos and photoshopped an opaque layer over them it would still work.

However, we are trying to test what he claims he can do and he has said it makes a difference. Since the requirement doesn’t seem particularly difficult to meet I can’t see any reason not to supply reasonably clear pictures.

Quality of the photos may affect the results. Shall we test this factor also? On a trial basis we may try on some blurred photos also, as one group.

[Czarcasm]

@RJKUgly

And what should be the mix of dead/alive?

sigh
There should be no hints, clues or suggestions as to the proportion of live vs. dead.
Period.

[JimOfAllTrades]

@Czarcasm

sigh
There should be no hints, clues or suggestions as to the proportion of live vs. dead.
Period.

sigh
Why?
Semicolon.

To be slightly less snarky than you were, please tell me what is wrong with the method I outlined in post 40. Small words please. After all, I’m so slow you have to sigh when I don’t get it.

[Czarcasm]

Because if you don’t give any hints as to how many are alive or dead, complicated odds won’t have to be figured in. Just give pramanujan the photos after both sides agree what would count as a “win”, let him do that voodoo that he do, and tally the results.

[SiXSwordS]

@Czarcasm

Because if you don’t give any hints as to how many are alive or dead, complicated odds won’t have to be figured in.

That would seem to indicate starting with a pool of unpaired pics with an equal number of living and dead and then selecting test batches at random.
…or am I over thinking this?

[SiXSwordS]

@pramanujan

This really shows that we are working together.
…
My attempts too are to find out if there is any truth in the pattern shown by the rod.

Not to be snarky, but I’m not so sure we are working together.

The dowsing rod by itself does not have any power. It works with select few people. I am one such person who has been using the dowsing rod.
…
With [the dowsing rod] I am in a position to identify the positive and negative energies at a place or of an object. I have also observed that the dowsing rod when placed before the photos of living persons and that of dead persons react differently. Further, when the photo of dead person is placed facing south, the dowsing rod indicates positive energy; while in all other directions, it shows negative energy.

This is the claim that is being tested.

[zut]

@Czarcasm

Because if you don’t give any hints as to how many are alive or dead, complicated odds won’t have to be figured in. Just give pramanujan the photos after both sides agree what would count as a “win”, let him do that voodoo that he do, and tally the results.

First of all, at the very least, everyone should agree *how * the proportion of live vs. dead is determined for any test. Randomly determining the proportion, for example, would be fine.

Second of all, at the very least, the proportion of live vs. dead should be determined in a way where the effect of the method of determination can be calculated. For example, it’s more difficult to get pictures of people who are dead than people who are alive. Determining the proportion of live vs. dead by the inavailibility of pictures of dead people would not be a good method.

Third of all, however the test is run, you absolutely have to “figure in complicated odds,” and I’m surprised you’d say otherwise. How, exactly, are any skeptics going to agree to the threshold number for a “win” if no one knows what the odds are for accomplishing that?

Fourth of all, there’s absolutely no reason that, for example, designing a test with exactly ten alive and ten dead people pictures isn’t valid or workable. Someone in the other thread described a JREF dousing test where a single jug of water was hidden under one of ten tubs. That’s a test where everyone knew exactly the proportions of hits and no-hits, and it’s still a valid test.

Now, if you’re just saying that no “hints” should be given after the test has started, then I agree. But that’s different from determining what the test protocol should be before the beginning of the test.

[SiXSwordS]

@zut

Someone in the other thread described a JREF dousing test where a single jug of water was hidden under one of ten tubs. That’s a test where everyone knew exactly the proportions of hits and no-hits, and it’s still a valid test.

I agree with the points you are making and I would like to point out that in the water dousing test, the claims (as I understood them) were based on the ability to find water and not the ability to find sand.

In this case, the claim is the ability to correctly identify the biostatus of the subject of a photo.

There could be a batch of photos that depict all biopositive or all bionegative subjects and the test would still be valid.

If we use a small portion of bionegative subjects and make the test “Find the stiffs” that could still be valid, but the test would need specific controls on the batches (e.g. each batch would have at least one waiting-for death subject and one been-there-done-that subject).

[Razncain]

I’m catching up to this thread. How does he propose to do this? The pics get sent to him, and if so, how much time does he have to get back?

Don’t do a yearbook. The names listed, and the location of the school would make it easier to do internet searches on those.

Nor would I necessarily say it is going to be an equal 50/50 mixture of living and dead. Let the number be anywhere from 0%-100% of living or dead. It shouldn’t matter to the dowser. Either he has the ability or he doesn’t.

For a preliminary test, you might just concentrate on 10-20 pics at first. See how well he does with that before wasting any more time with this. Send a federal express package, and note when he receives the package and how long it takes him to get back with his predictions. Surely he can do this in a matter of minutes for each pic? There are databases of obituaries now, although it would be difficult to search with the pic itself.

There is a simple and easy way to do a preliminary test of this, and also a way to gather pics of younger people that have had died of accidents and diseases. Get all pics from a large newspaper or newspapers. Make sure they are not in his area. While most obituaries are head and chest shots, there are plenty of pics in the newspaper of this format that are also given out for awards and other stories as well.

Anyway, just how much time does he have?

[Razncain]

@pramanujan

If you say it is conscious or unconscious action that makes the dowsing rod move, what do you say of the number of times I have dowsed for undergound water? It was 100% success till date. I have identified bore well points at many places.

Most people tend to find water in the States because water is pretty much everywhere underground, especially if you are prepared to dig deep enough. One visual clue is the presence of trees. Unless you were out in the middle of a desert, it’s actually a safe bet that you’re going to hit water. Where do you live at?

Think you could locate the 10 jugs that was proposed? If ten gallon jugs was located just a little bit from the surface in a small test area of freshly tilled soil of say a 40x40 area, how many do you think you could locate?

[Czarcasm]

@razncain

Don’t do a yearbook. The names listed, and the location of the school would make it easier to do internet searches on those.

Right.

@razncain

Nor would I necessarily say it is going to be an equal 50/50 mixture of living and dead. Let the number be anywhere from 0%-100% of living or dead. It shouldn’t matter to the dowser. Either he has the ability or he doesn’t.

My point exactly.

@razncain

For a preliminary test, you might just concentrate on 10-20 pics at first. See how well he does with that before wasting any more time with this. Send a federal express package, and note when he receives the package and how long it takes him to get back with his predictions. Surely he can do this in a matter of minutes for each pic? There are databases of obituaries now, although it would be difficult to search with the pic itself.

Make sure the database isn’t available via internet, and do not identify where obituaries came from.

@razncain

There is a simple and easy way to do a preliminary test of this, and also a way to gather pics of younger people that have had died of accidents and diseases. Get all pics from a large newspaper or newspapers. Make sure they are not in his area. While most obituaries are head and chest shots, there are plenty of pics in the newspaper of this format that are also given out for awards and other stories as well.

Do not identify what city the obits are from, make sure there is nothing in the photos that can give hints to location, and make damn sure that said obits aren’t available online.

[Czarcasm]

@razncain

Most people tend to find water in the States because water is pretty much everywhere underground, especially if you are prepared to dig deep enough. One visual clue is the presence of trees. Unless you were out in the middle of a desert, it’s actually a safe bet that you’re going to hit water. Where do you live at?

Think you could locate the 10 jugs that was proposed? If ten gallon jugs was located just a little bit from the surface in a small test area of freshly tilled soil of say a 40x40 area, how many do you think you could locate?

I think we should discuss the photo test exclusively in this thread, otherwise we’ll get bogged down in a thousand alternatives and never focus on the main claim.

[Irishman]

razncain said:

How does he propose to do this? The pics get sent to him, and if so, how much time does he have to get back?

The prelim already done had scanned pictures emailed to him. He took a couple days. We have been discussing posting the pics on a website so everyone can eval them together.

Don’t do a yearbook. The names listed, and the location of the school would make it easier to do internet searches on those.

I don’t believe anyone has suggested sending him a yearbook. It has been proposed to use yearbooks as a source of photos, but the idea would be to scan and crop the photos to omit any telling info like names, school names, mascots, etc.

Nor would I necessarily say it is going to be an equal 50/50 mixture of living and dead. Let the number be anywhere from 0%-100% of living or dead. It shouldn’t matter to the dowser. Either he has the ability or he doesn’t.

The challenge is to establish beforehand the likelihood of performance by chance, so we have a point of comparison. It doesn’t matter whether it’s 1 to 10 or 50/50. What matters is that we can establish chance performance, and verify the results.

Someone has to establish a pool of pictures with a key to who is alive and who dead. Someone has to collect them, make sure they are neutral by whatever protocol we determine, and send them. That person (and presumably at least one more in the group) need to know who is and is not dead.

It sounds like you and Czarcasm want to keep the picture info simple and assume the odds are 50/50 - either the person in the picture is alive or dead, and in a set of 10 pictures he will pick either alive or dead for each one. I don’t think it works that way. Perhaps uncertain can explain.

razncain said:

Most people tend to find water in the States…

I think he said he is in India.

[JimOfAllTrades]

@zut

First of all…

Second of all…

Third of all…

Fourth of all…

Now, if you’re just saying that no “hints” should be given after the test has started, then I agree. But that’s different from determining what the test protocol should be before the beginning of the test.

Thanks zut, Those were exactly where I was going with my questions.

@razncain

I’m catching up to this thread. How does he propose to do this? The pics get sent to him, and if so, how much time does he have to get back?

In the previous “test”, I compiled the pictures and sent them by email, he responded the following day. Based on my email communication with him it seemed to take about a day to test, print, and retest the 50 pictures.

As far as establishing a time limit, pramanujan, how long does it take for you to test pictures? If we scheduled in advance the time you would receive the pictures could you test 20 pictures in two hours? Four hours? Or how long?

@razncain

Don’t do a yearbook. The names listed, and the location of the school would make it easier to do internet searches on those.

As far as this is concerned, a yearbook would be fine as long as we’re not dumb enough to just scan a page and send to him. Obviously you would scan and crop out just the pictures, leaving out any pictures that show clues about the school and area.

But I have worries about the legalities of using yearbook photos. How do we determine if the various people are still alive? Would these people have to consent to having their picture published on an internet site for the test? Are there copyright issues with the yearbook publisher?

The consent and copyright questions may also apply to photos from newspapers.

The pictures I sent before were taken and/or owned by me, so I had no problems with those issues. For this test I’ve been thinking of gathering some pictures from friends and family. I would again then crop them all to about the same size and make sure clues about identity were cropped out.

But if we need 50 or even 100 pictures, it may take a while to get them. And almost certainly, there will be many more available of people still living than dead. This thought provoked my question about proportions of dead/alive, and if a test where the object is to find the one dead person among ten living people couldn’t be just as effective.

eta: Damn you irishman, you beat me to almost every point I made.

[Razncain]

Thanks for everyone being patient with me, while I catch up. And I apologize for asking questions that seem to have already been covered. I won’t respond with any more inquiries until I take my time with the water witching thread.

It’s not so much I think pramanujan has a prayer to actually doing what he says he can do–I’ve followed James Randi career for 30 years–they never get past the preliminary rounds. The Devil is always in the Details. For me it’s trying to understand how someone can delude themselves into thinking they can do such things, and even have they fail miserably under proper protocol, they still think they are capable of such feats. Some, I admit, actually put on a good show. Randi thinks most dowsers are actually quite honest, and that most fall victim to the ideomotor effect. Which I’m sure after I read the other long thread on water witching, somebody has already pointed this out to him as well.

Anyway, I’m heading there now. Looking forward to hearing more about the latest of pramanujan.