Double blind study comparing dowsing to metal detecting silver coins

now folks this is true story... no poking fun. i had a directional locator dowser thingy from yesteryear i sold on ebay for $75. no markings and sadly cant find my old pixs of it. i got it in 1970 from an old Great aunt and Great uncles estate in Florida. they died a week apart no kids. so we had to clean out the house. I was 13 yrs old. they were STRANGE to say the least., they were in their 80s. supposedly Christian went to church, left little house and so forth to church and pastor got car. but their secret stuff.. the adults ran us kids out of back room. many trashbags sealed up went to curb. we peeked about got a butt whooping.

they were into taro cards and fortune telling, the Ouigi type boards. i forgot how to spell it, my cousin found a gazing ball worth a small fortune out of Austrian crystal, and later tossed it in the landfill. got scared of it. dummy. Dad got the battery powered thing with a handle that was some sort of dowser and locator thing. was a aluminum D battery tube with brass rod wrapped in wire and had a soldering iron looking end. offset handle underneath. it had a sample clip and a little car light bulb. my dad went there as a young man and swore that my uncle put a piece of gold in it and it would light up near gold or point to where it was at. it was old, looked like when they first came out with lightbulbs for a car. my dad saw it work in the 40s, he claimed. we could never make it work lolololol. thats what i sold. there were other dowsers etc... and stuff we were not supposed to see. Lordy knows what went to curb, Astrological charts i know. Horoscope stuff. they lived in Wildwood Florida and he was retired railroad man. i went there only twice as a little kid. they came up here to Grandmas once a year. but it was a guarded visit to say the least. rest of family kinda knew but was not spoken, like say they died in 1970, so the era of see nothing say nothing. . my dad swears the aunt levitated a coffee table. ok. dad had a temper, I did not argue, so let it go. my older sister says she was a witch. ok let it go. now we got good tools a nice rifle etc railroad stuff and normal stuff but the hokey pokie went in the trash except the dowser and Ball which later went, still mad at the cousin lololol. . my very religious aunt would have taken the dowser thingy from dad and trashed it too. did not tell dad but the dowser i could see possibly working for WHAT IT WAS, and early type magnetometer or sensor or something reactionary physics wise, not pyscic . the coffee table... ummmm. ok. one should note that Wildwood, old Ocala, Winter Haven, were all Florida wintering grounds for Circus and Fair workers. so plenty sideshow folks, con artists, gypsies, and flat con artists. worked some police cases in Ga from folks in the Sunshine state.

do people have the gift? maybe maybe not. wish i had kept the thing. but $75 bucks went toward a used Silver sabre that has many times paid for itself. a sure thing.
 
I
....have nothing to prove to anyone, ......

Huh ? What does this mean ? Does this you WON'T engage ? :?: In the very test challenge that YOU so generously offered to us ?? :?: If so , then why did you offer it ? :?:

.....so I don't need to have any coins to give you or anyone.......

Then if you have "no need to give coins to anyone" (since, of course, you won't lose the wager), then gee : ALL THE MORE REASON for you to want to engage in the test. Right ? :?:

..... You are the one saying nothing works unless proven by science. ......

By "science", you mean for either side to 'show' it, right ? Is this what you mean by "science" ?

If that's what you mean here by "science", then notice that your side, therefore, invokes this "science" ALL THE TIME. By perpetually saying that: "Our repeated results show that it works". Well then gee, SO-TOO are you reaching for that usage of the word "science" here. :roll:

And all we are doing is saying : Great ! Let's see it ! You can call it "science" or anything you want. But just know that it's the very standard that you yourself are invoking . Namely : Results.

.....So according to science the BIGFOOT coil don't work, because nobody has been able to duplicate it, lots of people tried to do it. The makers of the BIG DAWG thought they solved the problem that others were having of copying it, but they failed.......

The problem with this illustration is that anyone can bring a Bigfoot coil to the table . And demonstrate the function and usage of it. Therefore : Presto, a bigfoot coil exists and works. So, what are you talking about here ?

.... If you do happen to get brave enough to take the challenge, after I find them you have to go on all the metal detecting forums and admit you were wrong about things working that science can't prove either way......

Yes. I am already on-record as saying that I would be the FIRST to implement and adopt it. And sure: I Will advertise my conversion to the world. Agreed. Ok ?

Now please explain to us why you appear to be backing out of the very test challenge that you offered. Since you are adamant that your side will not loose, and since that will mean that our side will be giving you a jar of gold coins, then .... why won't you make the wager-work-both ways ? (after all, you're going to win).

If you persist is saying "No thank you" to the wager, then : I will let that speak VERY LOUDLY to the readers here. :roll:
 
Last edited:
....
I think you should try dowsing as you fit in the category of skeptic.
....


In-so-far as it pertains to the current discussion (of "whether or not dowsing works"), there is major problems with your challenge to Maxx

1) If his attempt showed that dowsing didn't work, your side would summarily dismiss the results as non-valid. You would merely say that he "needs more practice". Or "Wasn't doing it right". Or "doesn't have the gift".

And so-forth-till infinite regression. So you see how your challenge to Maxx proves nothing for either side. Ok? Therefore :

2) It's not Maxx nor the skeptic's side that is being questioned here . Thus no need for Maxx or other new persons to "try it". It's the CLAIMANT'S SIDE that has made a claim.

Ok, wonderful. Great. Maxx can admit FROM THE GIT-GO that he can't do it. It was never HIS ability or inability or claim that was being questioned IN THE FIRST PLACE . It's the DOWSER'S claimed ability.

And if Maxx discovered , in-lieu of your challenge, that he COULD do it, then my challenge to him would be the same as to you. I would say to Maxx : Great ! Let's see it. :roll:

Ok ?
 
.....

I would love for you to make such a video and show us that the dowsing rods really work on silver coins or better yet gold coins.

Maxx-katt, the trouble is, they CAN make such videos. That appear to fulfill your challenge. They are known as anecdotal subjective testimonials. They do not fulfill a criteria with safeguards to rule-out other plausible explanations. They are not double-blind.

So when you go asking someone for video proof , you need to hone down what qualifies as video proof.
 
....why not pony up for a fair challenge? there will be no loss on your part because it works right?


Exactly. I have never seen anyone say "no" to a jar of gold coins like that. I'm even willing to fly or drive to his part of the USA, for the challenge that HE HIMSELF offered.

So what's not to love ? :?:

I think we can let his retraction of the offer speak loudly for itself :(
 
Again, I am as sceptical as anyone, I was simply offering my experiences.

I didn't mean to insinuate I found the silver half because dowsing worked, but simple to say because I lucked out and found the coin I can say honsetly had it not been for trying the coat hangers, I never would have found it. So I can say I have found a silver half thanks to dowsing.

As far as the sewer guy, he probably already knew where the spectic tank & lines were from past visits before we bought it. That makes more sense than having dowses it. What don't make sense is why he went to such elaberat hoax, for 45 minutes, and got no extra pay for it, but apprenly he only motive was to put on a show to make us think he dowsed it? Seems a bit out there, but you never know.
 
....I didn't mean to insinuate I found the silver half because dowsing worked,....

.... So I can say I have found a silver half thanks to dowsing......


I think there's an equivocation problem going on here :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation

The word being subjected to the equivocation fallacy is: "works" . In the first quote, you say dowsing "didn't work". In the 2nd quote, you're saying it DID "work" .

Which is a blatant contradiction. Unless we play the equivocation game and assume "worked", in the 2nd quote, mean that you were merely in a geographic location BECAUSE of dowsing (hence it "worked"). Yet the dowsing didn't "work" to actually do the finding of the coin.
 
LOL really not that tough Tom. I was trying to make a joke in the idea that I can say it "works" because I got lucky and found a coin. I didn't mean it litterally does work, I simple meant it is funny that I can say it worked because I did find a coin only because I was messing around trying to dowse.
 
I looked on fleabay today to see if there was a market for dowsing rods since they are cheap to make. There are many sellers for them. Most sellers offer a 30 day money back guarantee if they do not work or if the buyer is unhappy with them.
So, how can the sellers continue to sell them and offer these guarantees if they don't work?
 
I looked on fleabay today to see if there was a market for dowsing rods since they are cheap to make. There are many sellers for them. Most sellers offer a 30 day money back guarantee if they do not work or if the buyer is unhappy with them.
So, how can the sellers continue to sell them and offer these guarantees if they don't work?

Perhaps there's a re-stocking fee ? (so the seller is still making something).

And perhaps because the average person never gets around to returning things for refunds.

It's just a tactic of Madison Ave. sales results, that if/when a seller offers guarantees and satisfaction-refunds, that they're bound to sell more. And statistics show that the average person just puts it away in his closet. And isn't going to go to the hassle of shipping back, etc....

There's the humorous story of the "lifetime car battery" that Sears used to offer. If the battery ever went dead, you could return it for a new car battery. But the dirty little secret was that NO CAR BATTERY can "last a lifetime" It's a physical impossibility for a lead acid battery to just never poop out eventually.

So how then could Sears offer a lifetime guarantee ? Easy : Their marketing department figured out that since the battery was likely to last for a good 5 yrs. (a typical life for the top-end batteries), that the odds of any consumer still having the receipt after 5 yrs., and going through the hassle, was slim. And since the average person tends to get a new car before that time, and seeing as how the guarantee wasn't transferable, then the odds are, that very few people would ever actually follow through with getting a swap for a new battery.

Yet the marketing technique served to make tons of sales. For a very limited loss-potential on the back-end.

So too might the rod thing be : They just know that people will fall for this , with very few persons ever actually following through with the hassles of refunds.
 
don't mess with those cheap ones, most of the cheap ones are from china and won't work after a month or so.

Get the best and you won't have any excuses for not finding anything. Get these gold beauties made by the finest English craftsmen.

Only $962.55 from the UK plus shipping.
 

Attachments

  • golddowsingrods.jpg
    golddowsingrods.jpg
    25.4 KB · Views: 108
If dowsing in any form was a reliably scientific endeavor, Bruce Candy would’ve already invented the SMF dowsing rods, which would obviously be way better, having accurate discrimination and all.
Personally, I like to believe in things that I can observe with my FIVE senses…taste, touch, smell, sight and sound. The idea that a “sixth sense” (or even more depending on how wacky things get) exists with any real viability is preposterous. If someone claims to “have powers” and dowsing works because they and they alone are able to “make it work”, one has to remember that this is exactly how we got Jim Jones and David Koresh.
Dowsing rods! Sheesh!:lol:
 
don't mess with those cheap ones, most of the cheap ones are from china and won't work after a month or so.

Get the best and you won't have any excuses for not finding anything. Get these gold beauties made by the finest English craftsmen.

Only $962.55 from the UK plus shipping.
There are a lot of people out there who think all of us are just as nutty for spending significant money on metal detectors.
 
If dowsing in any form was a reliably scientific endeavor, Bruce Candy would’ve already invented the SMF dowsing rods, which would obviously be way better, having accurate discrimination and all.
Personally, I like to believe in things that I can observe with my FIVE senses…taste, touch, smell, sight and sound. The idea that a “sixth sense” (or even more depending on how wacky things get) exists with any real viability is preposterous. If someone claims to “have powers” and dowsing works because they and they alone are able to “make it work”, one has to remember that this is exactly how we got Jim Jones and David Koresh.
Dowsing rods! Sheesh!:lol:
The five senses cannot be trusted.
Any combination of a individual's five senses can be compromised.
There is reality and then there is the human perception of reality.
How close is a individual's perception of reality to true reality?
It varies greatly. Once I learned that, I stopped playing any kind of card games or board games.
Do a search for the blind card magician Richard Turner.
Watch his videos.
 
... The idea that a “sixth sense” (or even more depending on how wacky things get) exists with any real viability is preposterous...


IDX-monster, I'd have to break-ranks with you here. All you have to do is simply GRANT them that perhaps it's not "preposterous". And GRANT them their claims that it works. For sake of discussion.

And don't even need to dispute and discuss the "HOW" it might work. Instead : Just gently bring them back to *IF* it works. (not the *how* it works). And simply say : Great ! Show us !

Hence no need to dispute 6th senses, paranormal, science, magnetic attractions, etc..... Just grant them everything they're saying and then say : Great ! Show us.
 
There are a lot of people out there who think all of us are just as nutty for spending significant money on metal detectors.

If that is supposed to be a reflection on the age-old-question of "does it work", then here's a simple test :

Prop up a metal detector on a table. Tune it to a slight threshold hum. Bring in 1000 random people from off the street. Have each of them wave a gold ring in front of the coil.

I'll bet you that it will "beep" for each of them. Nothing nutty about this.

But if you meant that some people simply don't care for the hobby of md'ing, well sure. But I'm not sure how that has a bearing on this discussion. Some people think that other hobbies are a nutty waste of time. Eg.: Needle point, model RR'ing, birdwatching, video games, etc....
 
I decided to do the double blind study on dowsing that Tom in CA suggested.

Since I decided that by setting up a double blind study the rules were that none of the participants knew that the study was being conducted.

Me as the researcher had no influence over the study. I simply looked a lot of Youtube videos of people claiming to find coins by dowsing and actually made an unedited video their dowsing session from beginning to end. With the end being digging a coin out of the ground with no breaks in the video or any editing of the video observed).

Then I compared it to videos of metal detectorists who filmed the detection and digging of the silver coin with no video breaks or edits.

The results:

Number of valid dowsing videos revealing actual dug silver coins or coins of any type: Zero.

Number of valid metal detecting videos revealing the use of a metal detector resulting in an unedited video showing actual silver coins being dug: hundreds or more.

There you go folks now be prepared for the excuses from the dowsing crowd.

None of the dowsing proponents on this thread will answer the original question or this question:

Trouble with dowsing, I cannot find those youtube videos of people dowsing and pulling silver coins out of the holes. I wonder why I cannot find successful dowsing for silver videos on youtube?

But..., I can find many hundreds of youtube videos of detectorists pulling out silver coins from dirt where the detector pinpointed those coins.

Why do you guys who are saying dowsing works do not answer the MAIN question I have been asking? So I am asking it a third time. It is a simple question and not hard to understand.
 
....
Do a search for the blind card magician Richard Turner.
Watch his videos.

Got some links ?

And as far as the 5 vs 6 senses (and/or anything else that might explain the claimed-ability of dowsing), then : Ok, SURE ! Let's see it. I'm game.

And I know the play-book fall-back here will be "It doesn't work all the time". Therefore a failure on a certain day (when a double-blind test is performed) simply means it didn't work on-that-day. NOT that it doesn't work.

Unfortunately this is not the claim, leading up-to-the-tests, that the dowsers are making. Far from it. They claim that "it works", in a predictable way, over-time , and *IS* beyond random chance.

So how about if we extended the double-blind tests to go for every day, for 365 days for a year ? At WHAT POINT can the dowser cease to rely on "bad hair day" as the "out" ? At what point can it EVER be shown to lack merit ? 2 yrs of testing the system ? 5 yrs ? :?:
 
I

Huh ? What does this mean ? Does this you WON'T engage ? :?: In the very test challenge that YOU so generously offered to us ?? :?: If so , then why did you offer it ? :?:



Then if you have "no need to give coins to anyone" (since, of course, you won't lose the wager), then gee : ALL THE MORE REASON for you to want to engage in the test. Right ? :?:



By "science", you mean for either side to 'show' it, right ? Is this what you mean by "science" ?

If that's what you mean here by "science", then notice that your side, therefore, invokes this "science" ALL THE TIME. By perpetually saying that: "Our repeated results show that it works". Well then gee, SO-TOO are you reaching for that usage of the word "science" here. :roll:

And all we are doing is saying : Great ! Let's see it ! You can call it "science" or anything you want. But just know that it's the very standard that you yourself are invoking . Namely : Results.



The problem with this illustration is that anyone can bring a Bigfoot coil to the table . And demonstrate the function and usage of it. Therefore : Presto, a bigfoot coil exists and works. So, what are you talking about here ?



Yes. I am already on-record as saying that I would be the FIRST to implement and adopt it. And sure: I Will advertise my conversion to the world. Agreed. Ok ?

Now please explain to us why you appear to be backing out of the very test challenge that you offered. Since you are adamant that your side will not loose, and since that will mean that our side will be giving you a jar of gold coins, then .... why won't you make the wager-work-both ways ? (after all, you're going to win).

If you persist is saying "No thank you" to the wager, then : I will let that speak VERY LOUDLY to the readers here. :roll:

For science you not only have to show that a BIGFOOT coil works, but you have to explain how it works and what makes it work the way it does. Which nobody is able to do.

Now for the challenge, I remember you stating that you was willing to pay anyone $100.00 if they could show how they locate something.

I never said I would bet with you. If I were to bet with you, which I won't do, it would end out the same as a bet with a lawyer on shooting, he bet $10.00 lost and never paid.

Since you always use science as a reason things not being able to work, remember science also say a bumble bee should NOT fly....I see they guessed wrong on that one.
 
Back
Top Bottom