In Defense of the Water Witches

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

9 hours ago, XenoFish said:

It's nothing more than the ideomotor effect and luck.

xeno, you party pooper you!

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

9 hours ago, psyche101 said:

 

I don't like this test. The water is not moving as it would be underground.

What I prefer for a test is to let dowsers find many sources where they score a hit and then, let skeptics try dowsing in that spot to see if their arms experience a strong tug. That's more realistic. See below the success rate that the German experiments had in Sir Lanka, 663 out of 691. That is strong evidence that something is going on. Not perfect, but certainly not random spates of luck

3 hours ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

In Sri Lanka, for example, they drilled 691 holes and had an overall success rate of 96 percent.

 

Edited July 25, 2019 by Earl.Of.Trumps

[Grim Reaper 6]

11 hours ago, Emma_Acid said:

Please link to peer reviewed, double blind experiments showing the validity of your claims, and describe exactly how water creates this effect.

I'll wait.

I have never looked for why works, but I have seen it used to located a water pipe in a field and worked the first time.

[Dejarma]

On 15/07/2019 at 5:25 AM, Manwon Lender said:

I don't know how it works, but it does.

no it don't 

[Grim Reaper 6]

11 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

no it don't 

We will have to agree to disagree.

Thanks

[Dejarma]

1 minute ago, Manwon Lender said:

We will have to agree to disagree.

Thanks

na, prove it works

[Grim Reaper 6]

2 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

na, prove it works

I have no way to do that.

[Dejarma]

Just now, Manwon Lender said:

I have no way to do that.

so you just 'believe' it works- because you been told it does?

[Grim Reaper 6]

7 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

so you just 'believe' it works- because you been told it does?

I have seen it used to locate water pipe in an open field.

[Dejarma]

1 minute ago, Manwon Lender said:

I have seen it used to locate water pipe in an open field.

fair enough. have fun

[+joc]

11 hours ago, Emma_Acid said:

This is just completely wrong.

Please explain exactly what this "magnetic" pull is. It can't be gravity, because the water doesn't have enough mass, it can't be magnetism because the "straw out of a broom" is not magnetic.

What is this mysterious property that water has that science has so far failed to discover?

If you can't describe it, it doesn't exist by the way. Just saying "oh it exists" is pure handwaving.

Okay....a magnetic field...it could be ...entirely wrong.   Honestly Emma...I don't know what  it is...I am not hand waving however.  I can ....and anyone can...find a pipe with water under pressure that way.  I don't know how it works.  One can also find electrical lines buried using the same method. 

So...I call it a 'magnetic field' but that is probably a mis-characterization of the actual 'science' behind it.  However; consider the Zodiac.  And I kind of liken it unto that...a baby in the womb for nine months is under the 'magnetic' fields of star systems light years away...and the moon.  Can you tell me the effect the Moon has on the oceans?  I cannot.  

The rub is....there is some kind of a 'field' created by water...I don't know what it is or how to explain it...but it is there.  I know that you are a scientist...so...what is the science behind it?  I don't know what it is...but it is 'a thing'...

And regardless of magnetic fields...which I understand are an actual thing...I don't know how gravity works either...I will default to you for that explanation...and yet...if one puts a straw on a watermelon ...it does indeed turn.

We have therefore...things that are...which I cannot adequately explain.  Again...I will default to you to explain how such things work and how they should be categorized or explained.  But people have been finding aquafiers for ages using this method.  What are your thoughts?

[psyche101]

15 hours ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

Well I for one would state that the experiment is bogus. If the witcher is picking up magnetic fields by dowsing then water in a plastic bottle, above ground wouldn't generate much of a field.

JMO.

If running water generated a field, don't you think we could measure such a field? You don't think we would have picked up on that by now? 

Water doesn't generate any fields, running or still. 

[psyche101]

9 hours ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

I bolded the word IF in my post because I don't know. Even though water itself may not create a magnetic field the fissures the water resides in may.

Dowsers claim to be able to detect water in pipes so fissures don't seem to matter to them. 

9 hours ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

I watched an old man witch a graveyard on PBS that they were relocating and he placed red flags at the corners of each grave and he got them all right. Well got them all right for what they showed in the film.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a3199/1281661/

 

That link doesn't support that claim. It's nonsense. JSE is not peer reviewed, it's own institution reviews itself. That's not peer review it's conformation bias. 

The Dowsers seem more surprised than anyone at their failures. They obviously believe that they have such abilities but when tested they fail. Proof is in the pudding. 

[psyche101]

6 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

I don't like this test. The water is not moving as it would be underground.

The Dowsers didn't have a problem with it until they failed. They don't seem to think water should be running. What actual difference would that make? 

6 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

What I prefer for a test is to let dowsers find many sources where they score a hit and then, let skeptics try dowsing in that spot to see if their arms experience a strong tug. That's more realistic.

Whilst even I have tried that to no avail, that's opinion and testing nothing. 

6 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

See below the success rate that the German experiments had in Sir Lanka, 663 out of 691. That is strong evidence that something is going on. Not perfect, but certainly not random spates of luck

 

That's not research, it's an opinion. It's why it went through JSE rather than official peer review. They know it would fail of properly examined. 

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

46 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

The Dowsers didn't have a problem with it until they failed. They don't seem to think water should be running. What actual difference would that make? 

I have no idea if it makes a difference. I would just like to see a test that properly mimics what dowsers are used to doing.  

46 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Whilst even I have tried that to no avail, that's opinion and testing nothing. 

You've tried this...? Really...? I am impressed.

46 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

That's not research, it's an opinion. It's why it went through JSE rather than official peer review. They know it would fail of properly examined. 

Well, it's an opinion based on their findings. 96%?  That is not dumb luck. I am sure my saying that is more than just opinion. Something's happening that science is not quite aware of. How long did it take science to figure out what causes the Borealis?  2008

So there ya go! As usual, our opinions differ.

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

I have no idea if it makes a difference. I would just like to see a test that properly mimics what dowsers are used to doing.  

The dowsers themselves called it fair though. Until they failed. James Randi has done dowsing experiments with wires and pipes too at the request of the dowsers with the same result. 

Quote

You've tried this...? Really...? I am impressed.

You haven't? 

I've tried lots of things claimed like that. I grew up on a farm too, the dowsing claims were made a lot out there, but I personally never saw a good demonstration. 

Quote

Well, it's an opinion based on their findings. 96%?  That is not dumb luck. I am sure my saying that is more than just opinion.

I'd like to see if there really are figures and an actual study. JSE exists for people who believe ghosts exist and aliens are on earth. It's not a real science institution, it's just a hobby group at the end of the day. 

Quote

Something's happening that science is not quite aware of.

Doesn't seem to be the case. Experimentz such as the one I posted offer no better odds than chance would. 

Quote

How long did it take science to figure out what causes the Borealis?  2008

What's that got to do with this? A Borealis is a massive light show in the sky, it's not a fringe claim. 

Quote

So there ya go! As usual, our opinions differ.

And the evidence we do have still trumps anecdotes. 

Edited July 26, 2019 by psyche101

[Emma_Acid]

6 hours ago, joc said:

Okay....a magnetic field...it could be ...entirely wrong.   Honestly Emma...I don't know what  it is...I am not hand waving however.  I can ....and anyone can...find a pipe with water under pressure that way.  I don't know how it works.  One can also find electrical lines buried using the same method. 

To quote the great Grand Moff Tarkin, "if saying it would only make it so". 

How you do you know that the ground isn't full of water pipes or electrical lines and either way you're going to hit something? You don't, but no one has suggested this yet as a reason to why dowsers appear to be successful. Instead the default position leaps straight to "unknown force". 

6 hours ago, joc said:

So...I call it a 'magnetic field' but that is probably a mis-characterization of the actual 'science' behind it.  However; consider the Zodiac.  And I kind of liken it unto that...a baby in the womb for nine months is under the 'magnetic' fields of star systems light years away...and the moon.  Can you tell me the effect the Moon has on the oceans?  I cannot.  

It's not often that I'm rendered speechless, but... well.... what??

1. There is no "actual science" behind it, as there is no phenomena to prove.
2. No, the baby in the womb is not "under the magnetic fields of star systems light years away". 
3. The moon exerts gravitational pull on the oceans. What does this have to do with anything?

"I'm not handwaving"
*precedes to wave hands*

6 hours ago, joc said:

The rub is....there is some kind of a 'field' created by water...I don't know what it is or how to explain it...but it is there.  I know that you are a scientist...so...what is the science behind it?  I don't know what it is...but it is 'a thing'...

Well, no there isn't. Again - you're simply saying it in the hope that it makes it true. There is no "field" created by water. It has never been measured. Ever.

And no, I'm not a scientist, just someone who's keenly interested in science and actual scientific phenomena. 

6 hours ago, joc said:

And regardless of magnetic fields...which I understand are an actual thing...I don't know how gravity works either...I will default to you for that explanation...and yet...if one puts a straw on a watermelon ...it does indeed turn.

Gravity bends space-time. This has nothing to do with watermelons. And the "watermelons become more magnetic the less ripe they are" is provable nonsense. Watermelons contain trace amounts of zinc, copper and magnesium, none of which are ferromagnetic. But then neither is a piece of straw.

It's nonsense, like "don't put metal in the fridge". It's an old wives tale that isn't important enough for anyone to have actually researched it (I've looked).

6 hours ago, joc said:

We have therefore...things that are...which I cannot adequately explain.  

Sure, you can't explain them, that doesn't mean the phenomena exists.

6 hours ago, joc said:

Again...I will default to you to explain how such things work and how they should be categorized or explained.  But people have been finding aquafiers for ages using this method.  What are your thoughts?

Again - you're just saying that this is the case. You're assuming that the tales of people finding water with sticks are true, despite no actual evidence other than anecdotal (which isn't evidence). Consider this - aquifers can be huge. There's one in Australia (the Great Artesian) that is 1.7 million square km in size. You do not need a pair of bent sticks to find water with a target that big. All it takes is for a few people to strike it lucky on huge targets like aquifers and suddenly people think it's a real thing.

There is also the suggestion that "experienced" dowsers have unconscious biases regarding things like vegetation, which obviously changes when there is water present below the surface. 

Edited July 26, 2019 by Emma_Acid
Got my km and miles mixed up

[+joc]

2 hours ago, Emma_Acid said:

To quote the great Grand Moff Tarkin, "if saying it would only make it so". 

How you do you know that the ground isn't full of water pipes or electrical lines and either way you're going to hit something? You don't, but no one has suggested this yet as a reason to why dowsers appear to be successful. Instead the default position leaps straight to "unknown force".

I have been in the irrigation business for 28 years.  Automatic lawn sprinkler repair...that's what I do.  I have a machine that will trace electric lines and find sprinkler valves.  I can tell you exactly where the main sprinkler line is using two flags bent in a 90% angle.   Your saying it isn't true doesn't make it false.  My saying it is true does...that isn't anecdote...that is experience.  

2 hours ago, Emma_Acid said:

9 hours ago, joc said:

So...I call it a 'magnetic field' but that is probably a mis-characterization of the actual 'science' behind it.  However; consider the Zodiac.  And I kind of liken it unto that...a baby in the womb for nine months is under the 'magnetic' fields of star systems light years away...and the moon.  Can you tell me the effect the Moon has on the oceans?  I cannot.  

It's not often that I'm rendered speechless, but... well.... what??

1. There is no "actual science" behind it, as there is no phenomena to prove.
2. No, the baby in the womb is not "under the magnetic fields of star systems light years away". 
3. The moon exerts gravitational pull on the oceans. What does this have to do with anything?

"I'm not handwaving"
*precedes to wave hands*

The moon does exert gravitational pull on oceans.  Have you ever wondered why people of the same birth month (zodiac) exhibit similar traits?  I have.  And I explain it this way.  Water itself has no gravitational pull...it has no magnetic qualities...but it is affected by gravitational pulls such as the ocean/moon.  A baby growing in the womb is surrounded by water for nine months...the moon exerts gravitational pull on water...so...it isn't a huge stretch of reason to consider that the moon exerts gravitational pull on the water inside a placenta.  Nor is it a big leap to consider that galaxies exert gravitational pull on water as well.  My consensus on all that is that it isn't the day one is born that determines the characteristics of that person...the date one is born is just the end of the gravitational pulls of the galaxies and other star systems of the universe on the water in the placenta.  I conclude therefore that the positioning of the stars is relative to the characteristics of the zodiac.  Because that gravitational pull exerted by the moon and stars isn't static...it is constantly changing.

Please explain how a compass works.

Edited July 26, 2019 by joc

[XenoFish]

Hmm, micro vibrations due to water flow, felt through the ground plus the ideomotor effect. Sorry, just thinking out loud. 

[Emma_Acid]

23 hours ago, joc said:

I have been in the irrigation business for 28 years.  Automatic lawn sprinkler repair...that's what I do.  I have a machine that will trace electric lines and find sprinkler valves.  I can tell you exactly where the main sprinkler line is using two flags bent in a 90% angle.   Your saying it isn't true doesn't make it false.  My saying it is true does...that isn't anecdote...that is experience.  

That is the dictionary definition of an anecdote.

23 hours ago, joc said:

The moon does exert gravitational pull on oceans.  Have you ever wondered why people of the same birth month (zodiac) exhibit similar traits? 

Have you ever wondered why astrology is so vague it can apply to anyone reading it?

It is a mix of pure coincidence, suggestion and confirmation bias.

Edited July 27, 2019 by Emma_Acid

[Emma_Acid]

23 hours ago, joc said:

And I explain it this way.  Water itself has no gravitational pull...it has no magnetic qualities...but it is affected by gravitational pulls such as the ocean/moon.  A baby growing in the womb is surrounded by water for nine months...the moon exerts gravitational pull on water...so...it isn't a huge stretch of reason to consider that the moon exerts gravitational pull on the water inside a placenta. 

Total nonsense I'm afraid. 

Anything with mass exerts a gravitational pull. Like the earth. Which is exerting a pull over the unborn baby orders of magnitude bigger than the one the moon would. You need to take the mass of both objects into account.

Secondly - who does this make a difference month on month - what is the difference in gravitational pull from the 12th March to the 12th April?

And lastly - how on earth does this gravitational pull affect personality?

This is textbook handwaving.

23 hours ago, joc said:

Nor is it a big leap to consider that galaxies exert gravitational pull on water as well.  My consensus on all that is that it isn't the day one is born that determines the characteristics of that person...the date one is born is just the end of the gravitational pulls of the galaxies and other star systems of the universe on the water in the placenta.  I conclude therefore that the positioning of the stars is relative to the characteristics of the zodiac.  Because that gravitational pull exerted by the moon and stars isn't static...it is constantly changing.

You are not affected by the gravitational pull of galaxies. They are far far far too distant and any effect (which would be microscopic) wold be completely wiped out by the gravitational effect of the earth.

his is a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of how gravity affects matter. It isn't like everything that exerts a pull is attached to an object like a baby by a piece of invisible string - i.e. 90% from the earth, 9% from the moon, 1% from Alpha Centauri. That isn't how it works. Gravitational force is measured by using the masses of the objects involved and the distances they are apart. The mass of a baby is so small and the distance to Alpha Centauri so large that the gravitational force between them is virtually nil, and is utterly swamped by the gravitational force between the baby and the centre of the earth - which is much closer. For the same reason a large body of water like an ocean will be affected by the gravitational force of the moon more than a baby will.

And this still hasn't explained how gravity affects personality.

Edited July 27, 2019 by Emma_Acid

[Emma_Acid]

23 hours ago, joc said:

Please explain how a compass works.

A magnetic needle aligns itself to the lines in the magnetic field that runs north to south around the planet.

A straw from a broom is not a magnetic needle, and a watermelon does not have a magnetic field.