Baronage-Phase
Well-Known Member
Wow.
View attachment 132242
As scatterplots intended to demonstrate a relationship, those are appalling.
I think they are the locations pinned by the dowsers
Last edited:
Wow.
View attachment 132242
As scatterplots intended to demonstrate a relationship, those are appalling.
Just clear your cache or use an incognito/private session. They've published an article that vaguely supports witchcraft, they're hardly going to be competent enough to run an effective paywall.
It was a natural setting:It was not a natural setting.
It was in a 2 storey barn. Dowsers on the top floor.
Pipes laid on bottom floor.
No earth
no stone or gravel...just air.
This is why you should read the articles that you ask other people to read.Twenty-seven dowsers were taken separately to a small field near Liberty, Maine and asked to locate the best spot for a well, estimate the depth, and the flow rate. Pipes were later driven, water level measured, and the wells were pumped to determine the capacity. A water engineer and a geologist were asked to estimate depth and flow rate at several locations (the engineer and geologist knew of a nearby well, the dowsers did not). The soil was relatively soft, and the water table was nearly level and close to the surface. The geologist’s and engineer’s predictions were quite good; the dowsers’ predictions were quite far from the mark.
It’s the locations pinned by the dowsers plotted against the actual location of water. Scatter plots are the conventional way of depicting relationships (well, correlation); an actual relationship would appear as an apparent cluster of dots running in a straight line (or at least cohering around a line) from bottom left to top right.I think they are the locations pinned by the dowsers
Because the word "woo" seems to upset you.Why do you keep calling it witchcraft?
It was a natural setting:
It was a natural setting:
This is why you should read the articles that you ask other people to read.
Hans-Dieter Betz - WikipediaResearchers analyzed the successes and failures of dowsers in attempting to locate water at more than 2000 sites in arid regions of Sri Lanka, Zaire, Kenya, Namibia and Yemen over a 10-year period. To do this, researchers teamed geological experts with experienced dowsers and then set up a scientific study group to evaluate the results. Drill crews guided by dowsers didn't hit water every time, but their success rate was impressive. In Sri Lanka, for example, they drilled 691 holes and had an overall success rate of 96 percent.
"In hundreds of cases the dowsers were able to predict the depth of the water source and the yield of the well to within 10 percent or 20 percent," says Hans-Dieter Betz, a physicist at the University of Munich, who headed the research group.
And the test I cited in a natural setting was carried out in a natural setting.The German test was carried out in a barn.
Because the word "woo" seems to upset you.
Can you link to it again please?Do you have anything to say about it? You said you would be interested to see one.
It is fully understood to be superstitious nonsense.I'm just disappointed that people have to label something as witchcraft because it's not fully understood.
I did not miss it. You know full well that we discussed it yesterday.Shit ... you really did miss it ! Read the wiki page and realise that what I quoted above it came from the Popular Mechanics journalist.
You have said this several times, as though being 'a civil engineering article' lends the contents some authority.It's a civil engineering article ..
Can you link to the article please ..all I am seeing is you quoting a paragraph from it. Thanks.
I did not miss it. You know full well that we discussed it yesterday.
Yes.... this conspiracy theory is getting more elaborate. You would think they would have removed it by now.
credentials in a scientific field?
Hans-Dieter Betz - Wikipedia
What are you on about?
As I said, it's from the review article referenced by your civil engineer article.Can you link to the article please ..all I am seeing is you quoting a paragraph from it. Thanks.
You have said this several times, as though being 'a civil engineering article' lends the contents some authority.
The problem is that it doesn't; methodology is what gives findings credibility, and the methodology in that 'light hearted' piece means that it's incapable of saying anything about dowsing.
As I said, it's from the review article referenced by your civil engineer article.
You're going to have to take your grievances to someone else. I didn't call you a twat or a prick and "witchcraft" has been commonly used to describe dowsing in the mainstream media eg. in a link you posted on the first page here. Dowsers are also called "water witchers", witchy type sites wax lyrical about dowsing and Martin Luther condemned the practice as witchcraft 500-odd years ago.No... the words "twat" and "prick" upset me.
I'm just disappointed that people have to label something as witchcraft because it's not fully understood.
The one you've posted dozens of times.