Explain Water divining
Discussion
Just posting to get a handle on this thread.
Firstly to Eric, I'm a bit disappointed that you feel these threads have no place in the science forum. Whilst some of the topics discussed here might not have any current scientific merit or background that's no reason for them not taking a place here where people with a scientific background or interest can make comment.
As for dowsing, well I've played with that on many an occasion. I suppose my best result result would be dowsing an electric cable trying to determine if power was running through it.
The scenario was a long extension lead running about 8 to 10 metres down the hall way in a fiends house. He was at in his room with an Appliance that could be switched on or off silently. All I had to do was dowse with a plastic pendulum and tell him if it was on or off.
As the experiment progressed, and we were in our final year of proper A levels in physics/chem/bio/maths so not utterly clueless in setting up experiments, at one point towards the end I asked 'How am I doing?'. He said you've done it nine times now, last go....
Turns out I'd got 1 to 9 correct, the last one 10 I got wrong.
I dunno why, perhaps Randi could have given us a run for our money, we tried cups with water in at the same time and failed, but I've since dowsed for water pipes and never got it wrong.
To me dowsing isn't about attaining knowledge that is 'divinely' provided, and I'm perfectly happy to accept that when looking for water pipes you are subconsciously perceiving your surroundings, likewise with the electric cables mentioned earlier, maybe there was a slight hum that my body picked up and the signal is purely amplified and then noted on the end of a rotating pendulum.
I'm firmly of the belief that dowsing works. I'm also firmly of the belief that there is nothing at all mystical about it, hence Randi can bury pipes and run water as he sees fit and no one can beat his challenge.
However to say dowsing doesn't work, is plainly wrong, because it plainly does work given the right conditions and tools.
I find dowsing to be utterly fascinating and strongly believe it merits discussion in this forum For the simple reason that I think dowsing is only a method of amplifying a small signal that can be picked up using our minds and bodies.
Firstly to Eric, I'm a bit disappointed that you feel these threads have no place in the science forum. Whilst some of the topics discussed here might not have any current scientific merit or background that's no reason for them not taking a place here where people with a scientific background or interest can make comment.
As for dowsing, well I've played with that on many an occasion. I suppose my best result result would be dowsing an electric cable trying to determine if power was running through it.
The scenario was a long extension lead running about 8 to 10 metres down the hall way in a fiends house. He was at in his room with an Appliance that could be switched on or off silently. All I had to do was dowse with a plastic pendulum and tell him if it was on or off.
As the experiment progressed, and we were in our final year of proper A levels in physics/chem/bio/maths so not utterly clueless in setting up experiments, at one point towards the end I asked 'How am I doing?'. He said you've done it nine times now, last go....
Turns out I'd got 1 to 9 correct, the last one 10 I got wrong.
I dunno why, perhaps Randi could have given us a run for our money, we tried cups with water in at the same time and failed, but I've since dowsed for water pipes and never got it wrong.
To me dowsing isn't about attaining knowledge that is 'divinely' provided, and I'm perfectly happy to accept that when looking for water pipes you are subconsciously perceiving your surroundings, likewise with the electric cables mentioned earlier, maybe there was a slight hum that my body picked up and the signal is purely amplified and then noted on the end of a rotating pendulum.
I'm firmly of the belief that dowsing works. I'm also firmly of the belief that there is nothing at all mystical about it, hence Randi can bury pipes and run water as he sees fit and no one can beat his challenge.
However to say dowsing doesn't work, is plainly wrong, because it plainly does work given the right conditions and tools.
I find dowsing to be utterly fascinating and strongly believe it merits discussion in this forum For the simple reason that I think dowsing is only a method of amplifying a small signal that can be picked up using our minds and bodies.
Edited by The Excession on Sunday 29th January 23:26
The Excession said:
However to say dowsing doesn't work, is plainly wrong, because it plainly does work given the right conditions and tools.
If so, why has no one been able to demonstrate it in a controlled manner? 'Given the right conditions and tools' is a massive cop out - what conditions? What tools? If it is a real effect, then it will be measurable and it will be testable. The sum total of evidence in favour of divining is anecdotal, and as such is worthless from a scientific point of view.Eric Mc said:
I am terribly disappointed with the way the science forum is going. It is not at all what I thought it would be.
I did not realise we all had to agree with your point of view in order to post anything here. Last time I looked an internet forum is designed to bring together the differing views of people on any given subject and give everyone a chance to respond to those views IE exactly what is happening in this thread.
Edited by M5 Russ on Monday 30th January 00:15
I knew this thread would throw up some heated debate.
When I said earlier that 'to say it doesn't work is just plain wrnog'. That's from the standpoint of having tried it myself and also from the fact that all the water compainies and oil companies employ dowsers, some of whom I've met.
As for why it can't be demonstrated in a 'controlled' environment, perhaps the environment was wrong? Who can say, I can't explain it, but then there are lots of things that aren't fully understood or explained yet.
When I said earlier that 'to say it doesn't work is just plain wrnog'. That's from the standpoint of having tried it myself and also from the fact that all the water compainies and oil companies employ dowsers, some of whom I've met.
As for why it can't be demonstrated in a 'controlled' environment, perhaps the environment was wrong? Who can say, I can't explain it, but then there are lots of things that aren't fully understood or explained yet.
Saying dowsing works is like saying that Homeopathy does, and we all know just how utterly ridiculous that is.
It's not exactly something new and cutting edge, it's been about for a long time and you'd be forgiven for thinking in that time, if it worked, that we would be accepting so just like we accept that many other things in our daily lives are actually factual.
Of course, with the number of idiots who believe astrology and think it's actually real, or who frequently visit psychics to be lied to and told exactly what they would know with a few minutes thinking for themsevles, it's not really surprising this kind of nonsense takes hold.
It's not exactly something new and cutting edge, it's been about for a long time and you'd be forgiven for thinking in that time, if it worked, that we would be accepting so just like we accept that many other things in our daily lives are actually factual.
Of course, with the number of idiots who believe astrology and think it's actually real, or who frequently visit psychics to be lied to and told exactly what they would know with a few minutes thinking for themsevles, it's not really surprising this kind of nonsense takes hold.
S13_Alan said:
Saying dowsing works is like saying that Homeopathy does
Whether they both work, or neither work, or whether one works and one does not, that statement is illogical. You may as well say 'I don't like cheese, and I don't like fish, therefore cheese and fish are the same'.When trying to use science and/or logic to move forwards, you must either be scientific or logical, or even both
Simpo Two said:
S13_Alan said:
Saying dowsing works is like saying that Homeopathy does
Whether they both work, or neither work, or whether one works and one does not, that statement is illogical. You may as well say 'I don't like cheese, and I don't like fish, therefore cheese and fish are the same'.When trying to use science and/or logic to move forwards, you must either be scientific or logical, or even both
There's no good reason for an idiot who believes in homeopathy to get better nor is there any good reason why a person with two bent rods can "detect" water.
I have no view on the effectiveness or otherwise of divining, my only experience was when someone who had this "ability" did a demonstration when I was in school so it may as well have been a party trick.
About 15 years ago I worked on an IT help desk for a utility firm that also sold it's internally produced financial products to other utilities so we would get bug reports from a number of utility firms across the country.
What I did see on a number of occasions were invoices from divining companies\ individuals and these were often repeated. Whether those employing these services were taken in, or maybe in on the con I don't know, but a number of companies use (or at least did use)their services on a reasonably regular basis.
I hadn't thought of it again until I saw this thread but at the time thought, naively perhaps, that the companies employing them must have got some sort of value for money.
About 15 years ago I worked on an IT help desk for a utility firm that also sold it's internally produced financial products to other utilities so we would get bug reports from a number of utility firms across the country.
What I did see on a number of occasions were invoices from divining companies\ individuals and these were often repeated. Whether those employing these services were taken in, or maybe in on the con I don't know, but a number of companies use (or at least did use)their services on a reasonably regular basis.
I hadn't thought of it again until I saw this thread but at the time thought, naively perhaps, that the companies employing them must have got some sort of value for money.
freecar said:
Actually it's a really good analogy, even homeopathy idiots get better from time to time, just like dowsers get success from time to time.
There's no good reason for an idiot who believes in homeopathy to get better nor is there any good reason why a person with two bent rods can "detect" water.
Perhaps but the connection was false.There's no good reason for an idiot who believes in homeopathy to get better nor is there any good reason why a person with two bent rods can "detect" water.
You can make a case for homeopathy using the placebo effect - ie people feel better because they have taken something they believe will make them feel better. That much is proven, and is why pharmaceutical trials use placebos as well as the drug under test. At a slightly less scientific level, there was a demo on TV a few years ago where subjects who had taken aspirin were asked to see how long they could keep there hands in ice water. They beat the 'no aspirin' control group significantly - and it was then revealed the 'aspirins' were dummies with no active ingredient.
Dowsing is less vague. Bury a water pipe under the ground and see if the subject can find it. They will either succeed or fail.
Simpo Two said:
Dowsing is less vague. Bury a water pipe under the ground and see if the subject can find it. They will either succeed or fail.
There's so much ground water and so many leaking pipes in the UK though that it would be difficult not to succeed enough times to make it seem like you were really doing what you were doing. Add to that the real dowsing skills of looking at the lie of the land, vegetation changes, exposed rocks etc. and it's a charlatans charter.Maybe if they could do it in a country where water was scarce it would be of more use.
Simpo Two said:
Perhaps but the connection was false.
You can make a case for homeopathy using the placebo effect - ie people feel better because they have taken something they believe will make them feel better. That much is proven, and is why pharmaceutical trials use placebos as well as the drug under test. At a slightly less scientific level, there was a demo on TV a few years ago where subjects who had taken aspirin were asked to see how long they could keep there hands in ice water. They beat the 'no aspirin' control group significantly - and it was then revealed the 'aspirins' were dummies with no active ingredient.
Dowsing is less vague. Bury a water pipe under the ground and see if the subject can find it. They will either succeed or fail.
The interesting thing about the placebo effect is that some tests have demonstrated that it works even when the subjects know they are taking a placebo. You can make a case for homeopathy using the placebo effect - ie people feel better because they have taken something they believe will make them feel better. That much is proven, and is why pharmaceutical trials use placebos as well as the drug under test. At a slightly less scientific level, there was a demo on TV a few years ago where subjects who had taken aspirin were asked to see how long they could keep there hands in ice water. They beat the 'no aspirin' control group significantly - and it was then revealed the 'aspirins' were dummies with no active ingredient.
Dowsing is less vague. Bury a water pipe under the ground and see if the subject can find it. They will either succeed or fail.
Dowsing as a skill is easily demonstrated by experienced dowsers, but it's got nothing to do with any mystical b
ks, it's about picking up subtle clues from the environment. As we've established, all the woo-based dowsing techniques have been shown to have results no greater than chance. What I find interesting in all this is that rather than be interested in a human's ability to detect and interpret extremely subtle changes in their environment, the Woomongers would rather ascribe all kinds of mystical nonsense to it instead.The Excession said:
I knew this thread would throw up some heated debate.
When I said earlier that 'to say it doesn't work is just plain wrnog'. That's from the standpoint of having tried it myself and also from the fact that all the water compainies and oil companies employ dowsers, some of whom I've met.
As for why it can't be demonstrated in a 'controlled' environment, perhaps the environment was wrong? Who can say, I can't explain it, but then there are lots of things that aren't fully understood or explained yet.
There are well defined concepts such as the ideomotor effect that explain why dowsing appears to work in non-controlled environments.When I said earlier that 'to say it doesn't work is just plain wrnog'. That's from the standpoint of having tried it myself and also from the fact that all the water compainies and oil companies employ dowsers, some of whom I've met.
As for why it can't be demonstrated in a 'controlled' environment, perhaps the environment was wrong? Who can say, I can't explain it, but then there are lots of things that aren't fully understood or explained yet.
In your testing, what did you do to remove the ideomotor effect from your results?
Dowsing doesn't work, that's been proved. What's interesting is that many people believe it to work and are honestly surprised when they take part in tests and see that it doesn't. In that sense it's different to mediumship, being that most if not all professional mediums are fraudulent and know enough to never put their abilities to any controlled test. It seems that belief in dowsing, by those who do it, is heavily weighted by confirmation bias, in that failures are forgotten and successes remembered.
And for the record I don't mind these things in the science forum, the psychology of belief is very interesting.
And for the record I don't mind these things in the science forum, the psychology of belief is very interesting.
carmonk said:
Dowsing doesn't work, that's been proved. What's interesting is that many people believe it to work and are honestly surprised when they take part in tests and see that it doesn't. In that sense it's different to mediumship, being that most if not all professional mediums are fraudulent and know enough to never put their abilities to any controlled test. It seems that belief in dowsing, by those who do it, is heavily weighted by confirmation bias, in that failures are forgotten and successes remembered.
And for the record I don't mind these things in the science forum, the psychology of belief is very interesting.
The above is very interesting - clearly there are those who beleive that they are not charlatans (see Exec's earlier post) but are unable to demonstrate under test conditions. I don't know if any properly documented 'successful' water divining exercises have taken place - but then again I do not take much of an interest in the generic area of spoon-bending antics in general!And for the record I don't mind these things in the science forum, the psychology of belief is very interesting.
Is this all simply a figment of the imagination of the diviner, or is there something else going on?
From what I can gather, Randi is as much part of the show as an impartial observer.
Why not go see a diviner operating on their own patch and pull what they do to pieces? This may have been done already..
It may be, as you have indicated, that the diviner is just very adept at reading the landscap and tell-tail clues - but determining that fact would in itself be furthering understanding.
To dismiss it all as 'woo' (which I understand is derogative in these circles) doesn't do much to help understand what's going on, although you indicate that your understanding is that there is confirmation bias - which may be valid.
TheHeretic said:
What do you mean Randi is as much a part of the show? Have you seen their tests, (JREF)? He is not involved in the test at all, and simply answers questions at the pre, and post test conferences.
I don't follow the exploits of Randi or any of the subject matter that concerns his investigations (as you may gather!). But someone who lays $1m on the line could hardly be classified as impartial to the outcome of the tests.And, no, I've not seen any of the tests - its not an area that I follow.
There would seem, at the very least, and interesting psychological issue where there would appear to be some form of self-delusion both with those that conduct water divination, and those who use the results!
Ali G said:
I don't follow the exploits of Randi or any of the subject matter that concerns his investigations (as you may gather!). But someone who lays $1m on the line could hardly be classified as impartial to the outcome of the tests.
And, no, I've not seen any of the tests - its not an area that I follow.
There would seem, at the very least, and interesting psychological issue where there would appear to be some form of self-delusion both with those that conduct water divination, and those who use the results!
How odd that you would say such a thing, when you seemingly know nothing about the chap in question, the testing methods, or anything else for that matter. And, no, I've not seen any of the tests - its not an area that I follow.
There would seem, at the very least, and interesting psychological issue where there would appear to be some form of self-delusion both with those that conduct water divination, and those who use the results!
Ali G said:
There would seem, at the very least, and interesting psychological issue where there would appear to be some form of self-delusion both with those that conduct water divination, and those who use the results!
Indeedy... dowsers work along side geologists for most oil exploration teams.Interestingly this has popped up which is something I wasn't aware of:
web page said:
In Russia dowsing is taught as a science and many top dowsers are doctors, scientists and engineers. Professor Dubrov of the Russian Medical and Technological Academy Moscow is the author of 12 books and more than 250 scientific papers on the subject.
linky...(Although it appears Dubrov is into homeopathy so I'm already beginning to doubt his claims!)
Edited by The Excession on Monday 30th January 21:55
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff