Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 General Skepticism
 Dowsing used in industry?
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

garyflet
New Member

1 Post

Posted - 08/26/2007 :  18:50:42  Show Profile Send garyflet a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I was recently told that there is "regular use of dowsing to find water sources in science and industry, where there has been success beyond random chance." I haven't yet asked for a reference for this information. Any truth to this?

Thanks,
gf

JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED

2418 Posts

Posted - 08/26/2007 :  19:17:48   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send JEROME DA GNOME a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by garyflet

I was recently told that there is "regular use of dowsing to find water sources in science and industry, where there has been success beyond random chance." I haven't yet asked for a reference for this information. Any truth to this?

Thanks,
gf


American Society of Dowsers

This should be a good start.


What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13476 Posts

Posted - 08/26/2007 :  19:17:55   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by garyflet

I was recently told that there is "regular use of dowsing to find water sources in science and industry, where there has been success beyond random chance." I haven't yet asked for a reference for this information. Any truth to this?

Thanks,
gf

Industry has tried dowsing. But that doesn't mean it works.

As for science using dowsing, the answer is no.

You might find this article interesting, because it discusses the most extensive dowsing study ever and the source of the misinformation about the study.

Testing Dowsing The Failure of the Munich Experiments
From the article:
Conclusion
The Munich dowsing experiments represent the most extensive test ever conducted of the hypothesis that a genuine mysterious ability permits dowsers to detect hidden water sources. The research was conducted in a sympathetic atmosphere, on a highly selected group of candidates, with careful control of many relevant variables. The researchers themselves concluded that the outcome unquestionably demonstrated successful dowsing abilities, but a thoughtful re-examination of the data indicates that such an interpretation can only be regarded as the result of wishful thinking. In fact, it is difficult to imagine a set of experimental results that would represent a more persuasive disproof of the ability of dowsers to do what they claim. The experiments thus can and should be considered a decisive failure by the dowsers.

It seems very unlikely that any future careful experimental study of dowsing will produce results more favorable for the practitioners than the Munich experiments. An atmosphere more sympathetic to the dowsers, with so many concessions to their whims, seems hard to imagine. In view of the outcome of those experiments, it is very unlikely that any sponsor would ever provide funds for an even larger-scale study, such that very weak skills (which might conceivably have vanished into the statistical noise here) could be uncovered. (It is noteworthy that the U.S. Geological Survey concluded much earlier [Ellis 1917] that further testing of dowsing " . . .would be a misuse of public funds.") It seems appropriate, then, to reiterate here the general conclusion originally drawn from these analyses (Enright 1995):


Also, here is another excellent article on the subject.

Oh, and welcome to SFN!

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13476 Posts

Posted - 08/26/2007 :  19:31:46   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

Originally posted by garyflet

I was recently told that there is "regular use of dowsing to find water sources in science and industry, where there has been success beyond random chance." I haven't yet asked for a reference for this information. Any truth to this?

Thanks,
gf


American Society of Dowsers

This should be a good start.


He asked his question on a skeptic site and you send him to a woo woo site? No, that would not be a good place to start!


Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 08/26/2007 :  19:51:28   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
My brother-in-law, along with his son, have a well-drilling business in the San Diego area. They employ a professional dowser on all their drillings, and swear that he's the reason for their success. I have not been able to convince them that dowsing is nonsense, and have pretty much stopped trying. (Just the fact that they have never drilled without dowsing ought to make them pause to think, however.)

Several months ago, I told my brother-in-law about the million-dollar Randi challenge, and he was quite excited, thinking his dowser could easily win it. But it appears the dowser must have come up with reasons not to submit his claim, as nothing has come of it.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Edited by - HalfMooner on 08/26/2007 19:53:00
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26020 Posts

Posted - 08/26/2007 :  19:53:52   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The Challenge has changed, as of April. Only people with a media presence and the backing of a scholar or scientist are elligible any more. Too many worthless applications.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 08/26/2007 :  20:00:02   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME

Originally posted by garyflet

I was recently told that there is "regular use of dowsing to find water sources in science and industry, where there has been success beyond random chance." I haven't yet asked for a reference for this information. Any truth to this?

Thanks,
gf


American Society of Dowsers

This should be a good start.

Wonderful citation, Jerome! More like a woo dead end, than a "good start."

garyflet, you should be made aware that Jerome is anything but a skeptic, and does not represent the site, nor the critical thinking of most of our members. Most of us are very tenacious in opposing such unevidenced, even disproven, nonscientific bullshit. Jerome, well, is Jerome.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Edited by - HalfMooner on 08/26/2007 20:03:18
Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13476 Posts

Posted - 08/26/2007 :  20:47:21   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Dave W.

The Challenge has changed, as of April. Only people with a media presence and the backing of a scholar or scientist are elligible any more. Too many worthless applications.
Among the reasons that they changed the criteria for the challenge is that they did preliminary tests on so many dowsers and psychics it was getting crazy. Of course, no dowser or psychic made it all the way to the big test. Each one failed a preliminary test, after they agreed to the tests protocols, and there was no need to go on.

Anyhow, Randi and gang decided they needed to go higher profile so they could get more media attention in order to raise public awareness and to better educate casual believers in psi powers while educating the media as well.

Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

The Rat
SFN Regular

Canada
1370 Posts

Posted - 09/01/2007 :  13:25:52   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit The Rat's Homepage Send The Rat a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Believe it or not, dowsing was actually used by the U.S Army in Viet Nam in an effort to find underground bunkers and tunnels. I wonder how many kids lost their lives based on that useless information.

Bailey's second law; There is no relationship between the three virtues of intelligence, education, and wisdom.

You fiend! Never have I encountered such corrupt and foul-minded perversity! Have you ever considered a career in the Church? - The Bishop of Bath and Wells, Blackadder II

Baculum's page: http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=3947338590
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 09/01/2007 :  15:01:00   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Hi garyflet. There is a very simple reason for the seeming success of dowsers. They are 'testing' over the aquifers and simply cannot miss -- most any spot'll do. When they give a more or less accurate depth of the hole and the flow rate, they are giving guesses based on experience with that aquifer.

You and I could do it (actually, I have and thought there was something to it.... until I sat down and really thought about it. You have no idea how disappointing that is).




"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.22 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000