4 ms·

Everybody always thinks this about stuff that doesn't work. It turns out it's total bullshit. There was someone I knew who claimed that dowsing rods worked a s

Everybody always thinks this about stuff that doesn't work. It turns out it's total bullshit. There was someone I knew who claimed that dowsing rods worked a similar way. A good practitioner of the dowsing rod was really using the information from his audience and was Hans the Mathematical Horsing his way to water. The audience of course had this information from the subtle way they picked up on cues of water, ways even they didn't recognize until the dowsing rod was in action. They all think this. Some can even bend spoons.

boffinAudio 2y ago
[flagged]
- Y_Y 2y ago
  Maybe you should go back and try a control without the dowsing wand
  - boffinAudio 2y ago
    Done precisely that with random Monte Carlo digs on a site, didn't find water. Switched to dowsing, found water within minutes.
    - astura 2y ago
      There's a half a million dollar prize for you if you can prove it - https://cfiig.org/paranormal-challenge/ https://cfiig.org/paranormal-challenge/
    - 542354234235 2y ago
      Why would you do it randomly? When you have the rods, you are using your eyes to navigate the environment. If the dowsing rods are just a way to help key you into your own senses, like seeing depressions or slight differences in color, or feeling slight downhills while walking, then the control should be trying it without them. If I clamed I had a pair of glasses that improved your driving, the control would not be driving blidfolded.
    - krferriter 2y ago
      It's possible that you are biased towards dowsing and thus not a good control for the experiment. You want dowsing to work and thus try harder when dowsing than when not.
      - boffinAudio 2y ago
        So the intentions are part of the dowsing process, and the science has not caught up with that yet.
- Novosell 2y ago
  The studies section on the Wikipedia page for dowsing would disagree with you.
  - boffinAudio 2y ago
    Wikipedia is not a source of truth - only collective associative reality.
    - Novosell 2y ago
      Wikipedia isn't, but the studies listed on it can be. Unless science is all just junk?
      - boffinAudio 2y ago
        [flagged]
        digging 2y ago
        Your own study does not inspire confidence: > Several things that Mr. Carl does while dowsing don't fit into many of the definitions that have been proposed. Everyone who believes in it agrees it works, but not how it works? That's a classic sign of witchcraft. > There are many aspects of dowsing that were not addressed by this experiment and these results do not apply to them. Additionally, many people claim to have a dowsing sense but are not reputable. Beware of anyone who wields this work as proof of their skill. As in any scientific experiment, repeatability, under the scrutiny of the scientific community, is the determinant of valid results. Unless this validation occurs, these findings will remain experimental data. In other words, do not take this paper as proof of dousing and do not trust someone who links to this PDF to prove dousing is real. ... Here's the thing, nobody is here saying you didn't go out into the desert and find water. (Although, you're a random comment on the internet, so I'm not particularly inclined to believe a word of it either.) It's just that "dousing" isn't a likely explanation for how( you found water. At the very best, "dousing" as a name can be equated to "dark matter" - something is happening, but we know virtually nothing about what is happening or how. Explanations that rely on the type of wood used, or claim to be able to find oil* and lead in addition to water, just don't make sense. With dark matter, yes we're exploring as many explanations as we can, but most scientists agree that the more complicated solutions (such as "gravity works differently at very large scales") are less likely. And they still have a mechanism.
- ginko 2y ago
  All the people in your situation that didn't end up finding water by dowsing wouldn't be able to post on HN..
  - sgift 2y ago
    Literal example of survivorship bias in the GP comment.
    - boffinAudio 2y ago
      Its easy to "prove" dowsing doesn't work - all you have to do is not find water.
      - adammarples 2y ago
        Done
- mootothemax 2y ago
  It's basically a method to help you find a downward slope, right? In Britain, until surprisingly recent times, water engineers had been known to use dowsing rods to help find water pipes. As far as I can tell, it's a... method... that helped them to stop overthinking the problem, and subconsciously look at where the the pipe's likely to be, given the many small clues indicating previous engineering work.
- Stevvo 2y ago
  Anywhere you dig anywhere, eventually you hit water. So, yea, dowsing always works, But it's no better than random chance.
  - boffinAudio 2y ago
    Tell me you've never been to the Kimberley desert without telling me you're a regular tourist ..
lupusreal 2y ago
Dowsing rods are an excuse to trust common sense; that dip in the land where plants are greener is probably a good place for a well. But digging wells is expensive so people want something more than a guess, but also something cheap. When I was a kid, a new house was being built downhill from my parents and they dowsed out a "good" place for a well. They were all set to drill before my dad went out and told them they were directly downhill from our septic tank.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- lucianbr 2y ago
  What's "downhill from a septic tank"? Isn't a septic tank a container that slowly fills up and is periodically emptied by a truck or something? There is no "flow downhill", is there? I thought the whole reason to have a septic tank is that you have no place for the stuff to go.
  - jerf 2y ago
    Septic systems are more interesting than that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septic_drain_field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septic_drain_field A straight tank would fill up in no time.
  - mauvehaus 2y ago
    Unless you're in a location where you absolutely can't leach the liquid waste out into a leach field (like right on a lake), the tank usually just settles the solids and give the liquid some time to mingle with whatever biological processes are happening in the tank. When the ground doesn't perk naturally, it's common up here to build a mound system where you have a mound of soil that does perk and vegetation (grass) on it to take up the liquid. A fully closed tank is basically the last resort. We have friends with a house right on a lake, and their tank had to be pumped every three weeks before they had a kid. I can't imagine what the interval is now.
    - 2y ago
drew870mitchell 2y ago
A friend bought land to build a house on where dowsing was culturally pervasive. He knew it was bogus but it was cheap compared to the land price and everybody around was heavily pushing it. An old guy came out and, during the performance, told him the total history of the land parcel, including stuff that would be inappropriate in formal disclosures ("those neighbors are assholes" etc). They did hit water, but the whole area is pretty verdant.

boffinAudio 2y ago

[flagged]

Y_Y 2y ago
Maybe you should go back and try a control without the dowsing wand
- boffinAudio 2y ago
  Done precisely that with random Monte Carlo digs on a site, didn't find water. Switched to dowsing, found water within minutes.
  - astura 2y ago
    There's a half a million dollar prize for you if you can prove it - https://cfiig.org/paranormal-challenge/ https://cfiig.org/paranormal-challenge/
  - 542354234235 2y ago
    Why would you do it randomly? When you have the rods, you are using your eyes to navigate the environment. If the dowsing rods are just a way to help key you into your own senses, like seeing depressions or slight differences in color, or feeling slight downhills while walking, then the control should be trying it without them. If I clamed I had a pair of glasses that improved your driving, the control would not be driving blidfolded.
  - krferriter 2y ago
    It's possible that you are biased towards dowsing and thus not a good control for the experiment. You want dowsing to work and thus try harder when dowsing than when not.
    - boffinAudio 2y ago
      So the intentions are part of the dowsing process, and the science has not caught up with that yet.
Novosell 2y ago
The studies section on the Wikipedia page for dowsing would disagree with you.
- boffinAudio 2y ago
  Wikipedia is not a source of truth - only collective associative reality.
  - Novosell 2y ago
    Wikipedia isn't, but the studies listed on it can be. Unless science is all just junk?
    - boffinAudio 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - digging 2y ago
        Your own study does not inspire confidence: > Several things that Mr. Carl does while dowsing don't fit into many of the definitions that have been proposed. Everyone who believes in it agrees it works, but not how it works? That's a classic sign of witchcraft. > There are many aspects of dowsing that were not addressed by this experiment and these results do not apply to them. Additionally, many people claim to have a dowsing sense but are not reputable. Beware of anyone who wields this work as proof of their skill. As in any scientific experiment, repeatability, under the scrutiny of the scientific community, is the determinant of valid results. Unless this validation occurs, these findings will remain experimental data. In other words, do not take this paper as proof of dousing and do not trust someone who links to this PDF to prove dousing is real. ... Here's the thing, nobody is here saying you didn't go out into the desert and find water. (Although, you're a random comment on the internet, so I'm not particularly inclined to believe a word of it either.) It's just that "dousing" isn't a likely explanation for how( you found water. At the very best, "dousing" as a name can be equated to "dark matter" - something is happening, but we know virtually nothing about what is happening or how. Explanations that rely on the type of wood used, or claim to be able to find oil* and lead in addition to water, just don't make sense. With dark matter, yes we're exploring as many explanations as we can, but most scientists agree that the more complicated solutions (such as "gravity works differently at very large scales") are less likely. And they still have a mechanism.
ginko 2y ago
All the people in your situation that didn't end up finding water by dowsing wouldn't be able to post on HN..
- sgift 2y ago
  Literal example of survivorship bias in the GP comment.
  - boffinAudio 2y ago
    Its easy to "prove" dowsing doesn't work - all you have to do is not find water.
    - adammarples 2y ago
      Done
mootothemax 2y ago
It's basically a method to help you find a downward slope, right? In Britain, until surprisingly recent times, water engineers had been known to use dowsing rods to help find water pipes. As far as I can tell, it's a... method... that helped them to stop overthinking the problem, and subconsciously look at where the the pipe's likely to be, given the many small clues indicating previous engineering work.
Stevvo 2y ago
Anywhere you dig anywhere, eventually you hit water. So, yea, dowsing always works, But it's no better than random chance.
- boffinAudio 2y ago
  Tell me you've never been to the Kimberley desert without telling me you're a regular tourist ..

lupusreal 2y ago

Dowsing rods are an excuse to trust common sense; that dip in the land where plants are greener is probably a good place for a well. But digging wells is expensive so people want something more than a guess, but also something cheap. When I was a kid, a new house was being built downhill from my parents and they dowsed out a "good" place for a well. They were all set to drill before my dad went out and told them they were directly downhill from our septic tank.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
lucianbr 2y ago
What's "downhill from a septic tank"? Isn't a septic tank a container that slowly fills up and is periodically emptied by a truck or something? There is no "flow downhill", is there? I thought the whole reason to have a septic tank is that you have no place for the stuff to go.
- jerf 2y ago
  Septic systems are more interesting than that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septic_drain_field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septic_drain_field A straight tank would fill up in no time.
- mauvehaus 2y ago
  Unless you're in a location where you absolutely can't leach the liquid waste out into a leach field (like right on a lake), the tank usually just settles the solids and give the liquid some time to mingle with whatever biological processes are happening in the tank. When the ground doesn't perk naturally, it's common up here to build a mound system where you have a mound of soil that does perk and vegetation (grass) on it to take up the liquid. A fully closed tank is basically the last resort. We have friends with a house right on a lake, and their tank had to be pumped every three weeks before they had a kid. I can't imagine what the interval is now.
  - 2y ago

drew870mitchell 2y ago

A friend bought land to build a house on where dowsing was culturally pervasive. He knew it was bogus but it was cheap compared to the land price and everybody around was heavily pushing it. An old guy came out and, during the performance, told him the total history of the land parcel, including stuff that would be inappropriate in formal disclosures ("those neighbors are assholes" etc). They did hit water, but the whole area is pretty verdant.