water divining

Post 64 brings this forum into disrepute!!
As for going on you seem to bring utter lunacy to every thread you post on.
 
Bob McC said:
Post 64 brings this forum into disrepute!!
Click to expand...

Bob,

David, like others, is entitled to his opinions, as long as he doesn't refer to them as facts (facts by definition are indisputable). The "forum" doesn't necessarily share that opinion (or any other for that matter) so I don't see how it brings the forum into disrepute.

Bob McC said:
As for going on you seem to bring utter lunacy to every thread you post on.
Click to expand...

This is a bit too personal, please withdraw it.
 
lAmBoY said:
DavidF, pls follow the link and watch the youtube video.

http://www.skepticsfieldguide.net/2008/06/anecdote-about-dowsers-being-double.html

The dowsers were totally confidant of success prior to the dowsing test.

Alas for them the results didn't go well.

Any comments?
Click to expand...



images.jpg



(FWIW If you look back through the notes I think you'll find that the matter has been discussed :))
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DavidF said:
images.jpg



(FWIW If you look back through the notes I think you'll find that the matter has been discussed :))
Click to expand...

love the piccy :)

I just wanted to bring some scientific principles into the thread is all. It would have been interesting to hear from someone who believes in dowsing posing an argument against demonstrable facts. If you have some evidence (not opinion) to counter the experiment in the link it would a) be great to disprove an eminent scientist (biologist i think) prof dawkins, b) may make me believe in dowsing, and c) continue an interesting thread.
 
Gentlemen.

A good few hours ago I mentoned that this thread has, as far as i am concerened, run its course.

Any one still interested in founding out more about dowsing should look up the references I've noted in the previous pages (especially "letters to Robin"....an excellent source).

I'm quite confident these will answer your queries.

Beyond that I can only offer you one last link.....


http://images.google.com/imgres?img...v=/images?q=stuck+gramaphones&um=1&hl=en&sa=N
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, we have learnt that it is our problem that we don't believe in something that has no proof what so ever.
Also that purely by trying to observe the practice of divining you stop it working.

Sheer class!
 
penance said:
So, we have learnt that it is our problem that we don't believe in something that has no proof what so ever.
Also that purely by trying to observe the practice of divining you stop it working.

Sheer class!
Click to expand...


Andy....ALL this has been discussed!

So unfortunatley "classy" is just precisely what it is!

.......and if it still concerns you i'm afraid it IS your problem, yes!
 
hifinutt said:
I notice there is a lot of very scientific people on this forum.
could they explain this to me.

from the times.
steve robinson who is a water engineer doesn`t bother with high tech radio waves to detect broken pipes. he uses 2 old welding pipes and when he hits water they cross over. he is so accurate
his mates call on him and even his employers acknowledge his accurate results.

how does it work?
Click to expand...

Did you get an answer, hifinutt?

My guess is 3 possible answers:
1. Yes it works because there are forces at play we have yet to define scientifically.
2. Yes it works, but I don't know how.
3. No it doesn't work because it can't.

On Zerogain, the Gradgrind school will be in the majority of respondents.
 
Czechchris said:
Did you get an answer, hifinutt?

My guess is 3 possible answers:
1. Yes it works because there are forces at play we have yet to define scientifically.
2. Yes it works, but I don't know how.
3. No it doesn't work because it can't.

On Zerogain, the Gradgrind school will be in the majority of respondents.
Click to expand...



The question was not, as I understand it, "does it work?" but "how does it work?", although perhaps hfn could correct me on this.

So the answer is probably no, I'm afraid I didn't really give a very saitisfactory answer on its mechanics....partly because (I think) .....no one really does know(for sure)!

There are better, fuller, accounts (hypotheseis maybe) on the web but I have been encountering so much word +meaning twisting in the last few says I have not felt inclined to go to the effort.

Looking at your post again CC, no1 in your list is probably a very good way of expressing it.

What do you think now hfn?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

Back
Top