Dowsing

[Nearly Sane]

Everybody is familiar with the term 'vibs' - which means vibrations which is energy. So, someone can omit good vibs or not so good vibs. It's all about the same thing that Sriram is talking about.

Metaphors are not science.

[Walter]

True - here is the evidence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFPLk5mJ1D4

fabulous , made me smile , thanks 

[SweetPea]

Not everything has to answer to science.

[Robbie]

Dowsing is an ancient practice that has worked successfully in finding water for hundreds of years. There is no reason why water companies should not use this method.

This article mentions what Sriram is trying to explain. It's about the biofield of 'energy'. The reason science claims dowsing doesn't work is because once the sceptics interfere through double-blind testing the energy flow is broken i.e. the procedure cannot work properly.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17532-why-dowsing-makes-perfect-sense/

Yes!  Same article as on two pages back, thought I recognised it. I enjoyed reading it then and again just now, SweetPea, thank you.  As Sririam has said, there is a lot that cannot be explained yet.  Walter said the article was just a filler for the New Scientist on a day where there wasn't much going on (paraphrase), hee hee.  Shame!
[/quote]

[Gordon]

Not everything has to answer to science.

Explain.

[Nearly Sane]

Yes!  Same article as on two pages back, thought I recognised it. I enjoyed reading it then and again just now, SweetPea, thank you.  As Sririam has said, there is a lot that cannot be explained yet.  Walter said the article was just a filler for the New Scientist on a day where there wasn't much going on (paraphrase), hee hee.  Shame!

and it actually argues against dowsing.

[Nearly Sane]

Not everything has to answer to science.

Didn't say it did, so thank you for the straw. Problem is you and Sriram are making testable claims, now either we try and examine them using the scientific method or it would appear we just accept then because someone said them.

[Maeght]

So, what do you think makes the atmosphere change in the example I gave?

The atmosphere change is a change in mood brought about by our perception that a particular person has come into the room.

Vibes refers to 'a person's emotional state or the atmosphere of a place as communicated to and felt by others.' We communicate via our senses. No need to imagine some energy field being involved!

[Maeght]

and it actually argues against dowsing.

Yep, which is why I wondered if SweetPea had actually read it rather than just looked at the headline.

[SweetPea]

Explain.

Exactly that, Gordon. There is much that cannot be explained by science. Sadly probably never will be because science does not investigate the subjective.

[Walter]

The atmosphere change is a change in mood brought about by our perception that a particular person has come into the room.

Vibes refers to 'a person's emotional state or the atmosphere of a place as communicated to and felt by others.' We communicate via our senses. No need to imagine some energy field being involved!

who knew?   

[Walter]

Exactly that, Gordon. There is much that cannot be explained by science. Sadly probably never will be because science does not investigate the subjective.

but it can explain what you're talking about. Turns out its BOLLOCKS!

[Nearly Sane]

Exactly that, Gordon. There is much that cannot be explained by science. Sadly probably never will be because science does not investigate the subjective.

Except you and Sriram are making objective claims. You aren't saying I really like the idea of the biofield, it's got salty goodness. You are claiming it exists. To then talk about subjectivity is dishonest.

[SweetPea]

Yep, which is why I wondered if SweetPea had actually read it rather than just looked at the headline.

Maeght, the part of the article that stood out for me was... "So what happened? Baker’s explanation is that by relaxing, and suppressing all my rationalisations, I allowed my brain to tune into a kind of “energy” associated with the buried structure."

The author does add that he thinks there's a simpler explanation, but he's at least open to what the dowser is showing him.

[Gordon]

Exactly that, Gordon. There is much that cannot be explained by science. Sadly probably never will be because science does not investigate the subjective.

Don't be silly - of course science investigates the subjective: ever heard of opinion polls?

However you are implying objective claims that you say are outwith the scope of science: so what alternative methods do you have at your disposal?

[Walter]

Maeght, the part of the article that stood out for me was... "So what happened? Baker’s explanation is that by relaxing, and suppressing all my rationalisations, I allowed my brain to tune into a kind of “energy” associated with the buried structure."

The author does add that he thinks there's a simpler explanation, but he's at least open to what the dowser is showing him.

I LIKE MAGIC TRICKS, DOESNT MEAN I THINK THEYRE REAL

[Maeght]

who knew?   

Clearly not SweetPea - who the post was to.

[Walter]

Clearly not SweetPea - who the post was to.

Clearly!

[Maeght]

Maeght, the part of the article that stood out for me was... "So what happened? Baker’s explanation is that by relaxing, and suppressing all my rationalisations, I allowed my brain to tune into a kind of “energy” associated with the buried structure."

Again, this is not an explaination but a belief. I think you should read the article again with an open mind if that is the maion bit which stood out.

The author does add that he thinks there's a simpler explanation, but he's at least open to what the dowser is showing him.

Not really.

[Sebastian Toe]

Have you been in a room with others when someone has walked-in and the atmosphere changes? This is a change in the energy flow in the room.

Not what I asked.
"
 once the sceptics interfere through double-blind testing the energy flow is broken "

How does double blind testing break the energy flow?

[Walter]

I fear sweetpea may have been scared off 

[Robbie]

I think she is probably having her dinner.

[jeremyp]

But if they find out things about people by unconscious cold reading, where is the difference in that 'working' than dowsing?

Because spiritualism isn't defined as "finding things out about people by cold reading or indeed any other means", it's defined as "communicating with the spirits of dead people".

[Nearly Sane]

Because spiritualism isn't defined as "finding things out about people by cold reading or indeed any other means", it's defined as "communicating with the spirits of dead people".

And dowsing isn't defined by reading clues unconsciously from the environment. I think you might be thinking I am talkung about people deliberately cold reading as oppised to doing it unconsciously.

[Rhiannon]

If you dowse and find water or a pipe or whatever you have found something tangible. If you don’t the person who needs to find it might be a bit pissed but it’s not the end of the world.

Spiritualism promises to help people contact dead relations and if they are exposed as cold reading or in fraud (committed consciously or otherwise) then the consequences can be gut wrenching. And there is nothing tangible to find, is there?