Thread: Dowsing in the Falklands

Originally Posted by Oddbod

Originally Posted by big_les

That million Septic shekels is a real sum of money. Why has no dowser yet won it?

Possibly because the small print says more than the headlines.

I've used dowsing rods to ACCURATELY plot the position of land drains across a couple of my fields & to track the underground watercourse feeding a spring.
Neither of these were previously known & therefore a pretty good test of something to which I applied a high degree of scepticism.

With that statement you are heading towards deception.

No idea on the scienece behind it all , can't enter any of the arguments about the pros and cons cause they all go over my head , ( I'm just a thick country boy ) but ....
I've seen it work many a time , both with copper wire rods and hazel forked sticks , can't explain it and it was more than one person who got the results in several different locations .
I've even used it myself using two bent welding rods .
It seems to me that there are some-things that defy logical or scientific explanations, that sixth sense that made you look in the direction of someone who was about to shoot at you , that time you slowed down as you approached a corner in your car only for a truck to come the other way on the wrong side of the road, for example.
However - dowsing for mines would seem to be just plain daft - "ooh look the wires crossed" - BANG

well it may not be the daftest thing though. All I get out here is, never mind technology and safety, inshallah we will be safe. drives me nuts.

Originally Posted by eodmatt

Well I also had a high degree of scepticism, but it shocked the hell out of me when the bit of whale bone I was holding apparently came alive in my hands and nearly took my nose off. But you are quite right it was a sample of one and highly subjective. So I am interested in finding out more about how it was that the thing I was holding moved so violently that I couldnt control it and had to drop it. Ideomotor effect was it? Lets have some details about how that works please. From what I read on the website that debunks dowsing, the controlled tests generally observed twitching and small movements. In my case the bloody thing I was holding nearly took my nose off.

The best way would be to get some dowsing rods and have another bash with a series of buckets of water or boxes of copper wire that are covered and not known to you. If you keep track of your responses, you'll see that you've triggered some pretty major ideomotor response regardless of whether there's anything in the boxes. That's not a sound test protocol by the way - it's not controlled enough. But once you start counting misses and hits honestly with yourself, you should start to get the idea.

Or have a gander at this documentary - shows how strong the effect can be;

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...12885649996034

EDIT - this guy's using a stick, but the effect is much the same at 1:48 in;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOsCnX-TKIY

^the dowsing for metal objects bit is about 25mins into that australian documentary, by the way.

I've had another bash at my original request and came up with an MoD test of dowsing that does involve (inert!) mines, but wasn't done in the Falklands;

The only other scientific test of map dowsing that can be found in the available literature was conducted under the auspices of the British Army and the MOD. (Foulkes, 1971.) These tests were conducted to search for mines at the Military Engineering Experimental Department (MEXE). Seven dowsers, designated A-E, were given a map of one of MEXE�s outstations. The mapped area covered 384 acres and contained 6.7 miles of roads and tracks. Twenty inert mines were buried in the roads and tracks.

Experimenter A was sent a sample mine to practise on. He was informed that the mines were only to be found in the roads and tracks, and that any of his marks would be assumed to cover the full width of the road and a strip 10 feet wide. This corresponded to an error on the map of ± 0.025 inches. He was not told how many mines were buried or given any clues as to their location.

A then proceeded to map dowse. His first attempt found 27 mines. None of his marks were any closer than 80 feet from a mine. A then requested more samples to practise on, the position of two mines, and also that a stretch of road containing mines be marked on the map. This was done, and a 3,400-foot stretch containing 5 mines was marked on the map. A claimed to find 8 mines, and none of his marks were any closer than 20 feet to a mine. A then suggested a more limited trial, so he was sent a map of a figure-of-eight track. A 300-foot stretch was indicated, in which were buried 5 mines. Experimenters B, C, D, and E also dowsed this map. (See Table 1.)

Table 1. Map dowsing achievements.

EXPERIMENTER

DISTANCE MARK TO MINE (FEET)
A - 149
B - 159
C - 150
D - 102
E- 84

It is plain to see that even the best dowser, E got nowhere near a mine.

The original map and set up was then dowsed by Experimenter F. He made 26 marks on the map, none closer than 60 feet. He then claimed that the inert filling of the mine (sand and pitch) was too similar to the surrounding area, and asked to be allowed to search for a buried bottle of homeopathic medicine. He failed to locate this.

G also tried the original map, and was told there were less than 50 mines. He claimed to locate 53, but none of his marks were any closer than 40 feet.

As a comparison, 50 MEXE members of staff were asked to guess the location of mines in the 3,400 stretch of road. Eighteen guessed the correct number and one was within 1 foot of an actual mine. It is plain to see that the dowsers� results were significantly worse than chance.

from http://www.phact.org/e/z/dowseold.htm

Do you think this could be the one you knew of eodmatt?

I'd be interested to have a go at a proper blind test. I have done some on two occasions and found what I was looking for both times. However this clearly isn't a proper test as has been discussed before. The effect is certainly a very real one when using bent wires. The set I first used had copper tube handles so the wire itself wasn't touched by the hand. Something happens and as the only physical inputs can be gravity and wind it is hard to say what it is.

I'm a very sceptical sort of chap but have been quite struck by the effect and the results that I have had.

I do wonder whether things that have been buried for some time are more "detectable" than those that are freshly buried for the purpose of a test. If so, it might well be the case that the dowser is picking up on something such as the ground surface etc.

Priceless: He then claimed that the inert filling of the mine (sand and pitch) was too similar to the surrounding area, and asked to be allowed to search for a buried bottle of homeopathic medicine. He failed to locate this.

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

I'd be interested to have a go at a proper blind test. I have done some on two occasions and found what I was looking for both times. However this clearly isn't a proper test as has been discussed before. The effect is certainly a very real one when using bent wires. The set I first used had copper tube handles so the wire itself wasn't touched by the hand. Something happens and as the only physical inputs can be gravity and wind it is hard to say what it is.

I'm a very sceptical sort of chap but have been quite struck by the effect and the results that I have had.

I do wonder whether things that have been buried for some time are more "detectable" than those that are freshly buried for the purpose of a test. If so, it might well be the case that the dowser is picking up on something such as the ground surface etc.

Go and win the prize then. I am guessing that you wont.

Originally Posted by StickyEnd

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

I'd be interested to have a go at a proper blind test. I have done some on two occasions and found what I was looking for both times. However this clearly isn't a proper test as has been discussed before. The effect is certainly a very real one when using bent wires. The set I first used had copper tube handles so the wire itself wasn't touched by the hand. Something happens and as the only physical inputs can be gravity and wind it is hard to say what it is.

I'm a very sceptical sort of chap but have been quite struck by the effect and the results that I have had.

I do wonder whether things that have been buried for some time are more "detectable" than those that are freshly buried for the purpose of a test. If so, it might well be the case that the dowser is picking up on something such as the ground surface etc.

Go and win the prize then. I am guessing that you wont.

I wasn't claiming that I would., I just thought it would be interesting.

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

I'd be interested to have a go at a proper blind test. I have done some on two occasions and found what I was looking for both times. However this clearly isn't a proper test as has been discussed before. The effect is certainly a very real one when using bent wires. The set I first used had copper tube handles so the wire itself wasn't touched by the hand. Something happens and as the only physical inputs can be gravity and wind it is hard to say what it is.

Hi STAB. You should definitely check out the youtube video I posted - whether you loosely grip the rods or use a separate case/handle, the ideomotor effect occurs regardless. In the first case the muscles, ligaments and bones of your hands are able to directly affect the rods, in the second it's just the angle - BUT imagine a ball bearing on a plate (or those bloody annoying tilting maze games with balls in them) - it will rapidly move in one direction, and you will automatically add another input that will affect the speed and motion of the ball (or rods in this case).

In other words, you unconsciously move the rods regardless of the two setups - one makes for more subtle movements, the other for more dramatic ones.

I know the effect is uncanny, but science has figured out that it's down to the human body, not some hidden force. Note that even many dowsers accept this, and instead claim some psychic link that then influences the ideomotor response. Needless to say, there's no evidence for this, either.

BTW, last I heard our old mate Jack was living with his old man somewhere on the south coast! Kids are flying the nest later and later these days, aren't they? ;)