Dowsing

[keybored]

Yeah but just watch the speed that the hazel branch moves guys.

 

[Baronage-Phase]

I'm gonna take that other poster's advice on board and keep an open mind.

Either one of you could be dumbasses, or both.

Lol...

And more name calling..

Yes, I've read this link from 2001 which you have cited twice in 2 replies. It proves nothing.

Right...so the fact that the engineers quoted are happy to explain it as electrostatic energy and that it was (and still is) pretty well used in the industry is just not enough for you to think that it could be something other than woo woo nonsense.

 

[Baronage-Phase]

Yeah but just watch the speed that the hazel branch moves guys.

Deflection.
Class.
I'll just keep posting this...cos it's great to see engineers explaining it..

Locating underground features by dowsing

 

[Baronage-Phase]

Yeah but just watch the speed that the hazel branch moves guys.

Ps. I'm not a guy...

 

[keybored]

Deflection.
Class.
I'll just keep posting this...cos it's great to see engineers explaining it..

Locating underground features by dowsing

Would you like me to post links where engineers explain it's bollocks?

 

[Signal 11]

Right...so the fact that the engineers quoted are happy to explain it as electrostatic energy

Where are the results showing the measurements of that?

 

[Baronage-Phase]

The journalist may well have been taken in by what he thought was a proper paper published by someone who really does have credentials in a scientific field.

And these don't have enough credentials for you???

Grounds AC (1996).Dowsing as a tool for location of underground services.BEng Dissertation, Ref ES/96, Boots Library, Nottingham Trent University.

Hansen GP (1982).Dowsing - a review of experimental research.J Soc Psychical Research 51 (792) 343- 367.

Killip I (1984).Detecting geophysical anomalies at construction sites by dowsing.Land and mineral surveying 2 (12),633-644.

Wilcock J (1994).Royal Forest of Dean caving symposium. www-sop.inria.fr/agos-sophia/sis/dowsing/dowsdean.html

 

[Baronage-Phase]

Where are the results showing the measurements of that?

Lol

 

[keybored]

A witch (1764).I found myself in a large body of water for spouting nonsense.

 

[Baronage-Phase]

Would you like me to post links where engineers explain it's bollocks?

Next you'll be saying that engineers aren't scientists.

 

[Signal 11]

And these don't have enough credentials for you???

I said he DID have credentials in one field. And that may have lead to the journalist being more credulous than they should have been.

 

[Signal 11]

Grounds AC (1996).Dowsing as a tool for location of underground services.BEng Dissertation, Ref ES/96, Boots Library, Nottingham Trent University.

Hansen GP (1982).Dowsing - a review of experimental research.J Soc Psychical Research 51 (792) 343- 367.

Killip I (1984).Detecting geophysical anomalies at construction sites by dowsing.Land and mineral surveying 2 (12),633-644.

Wilcock J (1994).Royal Forest of Dean caving symposium. www-sop.inria.fr/agos-sophia/sis/dowsing/dowsdean.html

Do any of those have the results I asked for above? If so which one?

 

[Baronage-Phase]

A witch (1764).I found myself in a large body of water for spouting nonsense.

And again....
And because you keep trying to make waves...

Just in case anyone missed it...

Locating underground features by dowsing

From the New Civil Engineering magazine...a UK magazine of long standing..for Civil Engineers

 

[keybored]

Next you'll be saying that engineers aren't scientists.

Not sure if that's a non sequitur or an attempt at strawman.

 

[Signal 11]

Where are the results showing the measurements of that?

Lol

This isn't the way to be taken seriously.

 

[Baronage-Phase]

Do any of those have the results I asked for above? If so which one?

Lol..
Go look yourself.
I don't need convincing.
The New Civil Engineer Magazine is well respected...as is Trent University...

 

[Baronage-Phase]

This isn't the way to be taken seriously.

Well...why don't you read the New Civil Engineer article? And the references.

And stop name calling.

 

[Signal 11]

I don't need convincing.

I know. You're the one trying to convince us. And you're not succeeding.

 

[Signal 11]

And stop name calling.

You started that you twat.

 

[keybored]

Well...why don't you read the New Civil Engineer article? And the references.

It's absolutely hilarious that you're reduced to citing that same single article, with references from last millennium

 

[Baronage-Phase]

You started that you twat.

Actually...I did not call you names.

 

[Signal 11]

Actually...I did not call you names.

Yes you did.

 

[Baronage-Phase]

It's absolutely hilarious that you're reduced to citing that same single article, with references from last millennium

I'm sure you think Einstein is old hat too eh?

The article stands ... and the references stand.

Yes you did.

You've quoted no name calling...
Now I know why you're finding all this so difficult.... you accuse me of name calling
..and you quote me supposedly name calling...only I didn't... unless you're offended by the word blinkered.?

I've been called a prick and a twat....

 

[keybored]

And all the civil engineers too ?

So not "all the civil engineers" then.

 

[Baronage-Phase]

I'm off to bed.

Read the New Civil Engineer article again....and if you can't grasp the meaning then take it up with them.
Night night..

 

[keybored]

I'm off to bed.

Read the New Civil Engineer article again....and if you can't grasp the meaning then take it up with them.
Night night..

I think the YouTube link you posted was more entertaining and just as scientifically informed.

Just watch the speed that the hazel branch moves .

 

[Signal 11]

The article stands ... and the references stand.

The article is simply an anecdote about a few people using dowsing without any kind of proper testing, along with some speculation that is not supported by any evidence and which directly contradicts the claims of the dowser you posted earlier. It's worthless.

 

[spanglechick]

I posted that again and again because people(who didn`t read the thread) asked for it again and again. The point you make about controlled conditions has already been dealt with in the thread Controlled conditions don`t have to be contained to a lab. As I mentioned earlier.... because the mechanism is not understood you might remove it when entering the lab.
I`m not pretending that there is conclusive proof that it works ... I am saying there is not conclusive proof that its all a load of wank.




FFS learn to read



Sorry, WHAT PART OF SCIENTIFIC STUDY GROUP DON`T YOU UNDERSTAND ?



That maybe the case for science but it is not the case for U75 posters.

I don't think that's true. beesonthewhatnow is likely ourmost woophobic poster... bees, if the scientific method could observe and replicate dowsing would you be happy or not?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

I don't think that's true. beesonthewhatnow is likely ourmost woophobic poster... bees, if the scientific method could observe and replicate dowsing would you be happy or not?

My position on anything in life is very simple - show it to be true, with evidence.

Look at the universe around you, it is full of the most incredible, fantastic and quite frankly impossible things. It is a source of wonder, beauty and amazement. All of which is better for being true. We don’t need woo, the world has more than enough to keep us questioning and discovering for a thousand lifetimes and more.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

It's absolutely hilarious that you're reduced to citing that same single article, with references from last millennium

It’s another cornerstone of pseudoscientific thinking. Ignore a vast body of evidence and cling to the one result you can find that supports* your position, as if it somehow invalidates everything else, rather than either being a statistical outlier or experimental error.

See also conspiracy theorists, alternative medicine supporters, vaccine deniers etc etc




*although in this case it’s rather clear it doesn’t even do this