Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Dowsing

Do you believe dowsing for water works?

  • Total voters
    33
Mine found picking up dust a challenge, let alone water. Those Henry vacuums look like they might be able to deal with liquids spills.
Personally I'd stick to using a traditional mop.
 
PippinTook said:
It's got fuck all to do with fairies religion Eskimos...

I bet you'd think magnetism was woo woo too only we all know now that it isn't.
Click to expand...
Have you been on the lead paint or something?
Magnetism is observable. Even without a good theory of magnetic forces.
Divining water is quite the opposite. There is zero evidence of it working.
 
joustmaster - How does light travel through the vacuum of space genius ?

+you haven't read this thread through have you. Because there is evidence... and its on this thread :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
That would be a rational explanation :) But unprovable due to the limits of our tec.
I once did sound for a scientific conference on energy transmission. I asked all the speakers. They did not like the question, and had to admit they simply did not know. This does not stop light travelling through a vacuum !
 
Pickman's model said:
I find it astonishing anyone gets so utterly riled by dowsing, should be a poll option for 'I don't give a shit'
Click to expand...
Like most forms of woo, it’s where it all leads to.

In dowsings case, this is people being blown up by roadside bombs due to the military spending millions on fake bomb detectors.

This stuff isn’t harmless and it needs challenging.
 
joustmaster said:
Have you been on the lead paint or something?
Magnetism is observable. Even without a good theory of magnetic forces.
Divining water is quite the opposite. There is zero evidence of it working.
Click to expand...

Dowsing for water is also something that has happened for 1000s of years...even if it doesn't work in a laboratory. It's not about detecting only water..
I wouldn't have believed that it could be done either...until I saw it done.
And I trusted the individual doing it to be someone who doesn't lie....namely my grandad. He was a quiet, very nice old man who happened to have a huge knowledge of nature, plants and animals...and natural medicines. He was not a woo woo man...just a country man with a lot of knowledge. Not a charlatan...not a nutter...none of the names that people have used here. He didn't make a mystery of any of it. It was just stuff he knew and did.

The thing is that in some ways science is still catching up and realising that old knowledge wasn't all mumbo jumbo.
 
Ralph Llama said:
They did not like the question, and had to admit they simply did not know.
Click to expand...
I imagine they didn't like the question because everyone who ever asks it is attempting some sort of tedious 'gotcha!' rather than because their lack of knowledge of the answer is discomforting.
 
Ralph Llama said:
That would be a rational explanation :) But unprovable due to the limits of our tec.
I once did sound for a scientific conference on energy transmission. I asked all the speakers. They did not like the question, and had to admit they simply did not know. This does not stop light travelling through a vacuum !
Click to expand...
And this is where woo peddling muppets always go wrong. Rather than accepting “we don’t know” as an answer or a point from which to investigate further, they simply fill the gap with bullshit.
 
PippinTook said:
Dowsing for water is also something that has happened for 1000s of years...even if it doesn't work in a laboratory. It's not about detecting only water..
I wouldn't have believed that it could be done either...until I saw it done.
And I trusted the individual doing it to be someone who doesn't lie....namely my grandad. He was a quiet, very nice old man who happened to have a huge knowledge of nature, plants and animals...and natural medicines. He was not a woo woo man...just a country man with a lot of knowledge. Not a charlatan...not a nutter...none of the names that people have used here. He didn't make a mystery of any of it. It was just stuff he knew and did.

The thing is that in some ways science is still catching up and realising that old knowledge wasn't all mumbo jumbo.
Click to expand...
Just re-read your opening sentence in this post.
You are saying that it works, but not when you have controlled tests.
Do you know how crackers that sounds.

You've been fool. And whats worse is you have fooled yourself
 
Ralph Llama said:
joustmaster - How does light travel through the vacuum of space genius ?

+you haven't read this thread through have you. Because there is evidence... and its on this thread :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I have an A Level in physics form a a long time ago. I have some memory of the different ways electromagnetic waves travel. Why do you need me to explain what I remember? Are you confusing sound need a medium to travel in, with light that doesn't?

The point is that it clearly and evidently does travel in a vacuum. Where as there is no evidence of water being found by an old boy with a bent stick. Unless you want to count the story of a person tricked by their grandad.
 
joustmaster said:
There is zero evidence that it works.
Its just the same as dragons, fairies, father christmas, eskimos, and religion.
Only believed in by children, the simple, or the gullible.
Click to expand...

Total rubbish. Your average Swede rejects superstition at least in part because that's what their society tells them to do – exactly the same mechanism that leads the average Nigerian to accept superstitious beliefs. That doesn't make the two positions equal – clearly, things which can be rationally or empirically supported are objectively superior to those that cannot. But few non-superstitious people hold that position purely on the basis of direct personal inquiry, and a great many, in my experience, arrive at it through blind trust in people around them.
 
joustmaster said:
Just re-read your opening sentence in this post.
You are saying that it works, but not when you have controlled tests.
Do you know how crackers that sounds.

You've been fool. And whats worse is you have fooled yourself
Click to expand...


No.. I'm saying the so called "controlled tests" did not replicate the conditions ... they were not based on detecting water through 20ft of rock and soil.

As for calling me a fool...that's not so nice.

As for your A level physics ..
I'll raise you Physics, Chemistry and Applied maths.

I can't explain why two rods move..and I've read all explanations and a lot of scientific research purposes that it is the person holding the rods that makes it move. Maybe that's the case...maybe not. They are only now discovering new organs in the body...there is a lot we don't know yet and I'm not going to limit myself because someone thinks some thing is woo woo when it may just be as yet not fully undwrstood. Even if it is the person's movement causing the rod to move at the right spot...I'd like to know why and it's not enough to say that they might have prior knowledge or know the land they are on.

I saw my grandad locate water for plenty people by dowsing. He didn't make a deal of it...he certainly didn't think it was woo woo...and he was an exceptionally intelligent man. But he did know that it worked for him.
That's enough to spark my inquisitiveness and to not immediately dismiss something completely because the situation was tested in a lab that did not replicate natural conditions.

The earth and it's makeup is far more complex that we fully understood even 100 years ago...
I think in another 100 years we will have many more answers to things we don't fully understand or appreciate.

I'll tell you what... ask the water companies why they still have divining rods?
10 out of 12 companies in the UK have them and will pull them out when the tech isn't quite on it. They're not used alone...but if they are complete bunkum then why bother having them at all?
 
beesonthewhatnow said:
And this is where woo peddling muppets always go wrong. Rather than accepting “we don’t know” as an answer or a point from which to investigate further, they simply fill the gap with bullshit.
Click to expand...

No. I was making a point about the limits of current technology and it`s inability to explain phenomena that we know is real (light- vacuum) and that how if you limited yourself to current levels of understanding you would be an ignorant fucktard, just like you.
Need I point out the obvious hypocrisy of your statement ? Probably. Your not accepting that you don`t know are you .... you arrogant muppet!
 
joustmaster said:
I have an A Level in physics form a a long time ago. I have some memory of the different ways electromagnetic waves travel. Why do you need me to explain what I remember? Are you confusing sound need a medium to travel in, with light that doesn't?

The point is that it clearly and evidently does travel in a vacuum. Where as there is no evidence of water being found by an old boy with a bent stick. Unless you want to count the story of a person tricked by their grandad.
Click to expand...

need I bother ... really?
 
And...@joustmaster.
Explain to me why atomic particles (electrons) behave differently when observed?

We know barely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to fully understanding anything.
 
For all who think we know everything about everything because our science is better than it was 50 years ago...
We know not a lot.
:D

images(14).jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom