Psychical Physics by Tromp

[Mike(Mont)]

I would not recommend this book. It has a lot of info, but it's 65 years old. Tromp was a skeptic but after doing research he came to understand that dowsing is real. This book give me the creeps. There are some experiments discussed that just make me very uncomfortable. If you want references, he has 1496 sources listed. No doubt many people have used this book to build their knowledge base, but I don't think it is current enough to be of much use today unless you are a total dowsing geek/nerd.

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

Tromp was a skeptic but after doing research he came to understand that dowsing is real.

.

Mike, no one claims that dowsing is not real.

Dowsing is real.

Real (mostly unconsciously) auto-scam.

[Mike(Mont)]

Nobody claims skeptics aren't real, either. Real idiots.

I wish someone would have told me that book is so nerdy, it's nauseating in places. I really wish I hadn't even read it.

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

Nobody claims skeptics aren't real, either. Real idiots.

.

Is it possible that from skeptics as you were in past, incurred smart guy?

[ivconic]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

Nobody claims skeptics aren't real, either. Real idiots.

I wish someone would have told me that book is so nerdy, it's nauseating in places. I really wish I hadn't even read it.

Eh!? You are actually saying sceptics are idiots?
Not constructive. As sceptic i feel offended. You should explain your attitude on this...

[Mike(Mont)]

BTW, I saw some ridiculously high priced copies of this book on ebay. Don't waste your money.

[WM6]

Agree Mike, it is better to buy gold jewelry.

[Mike(Mont)]

I paid too much for the copy I got. I'll sell it cheap --$40 shipped.

[Tinkerer]

Here is another dowsing http://www.tricksterbook.com/ArticlesOnline/Dowsing.htm

Tinkerer

[Mike(Mont)]

FYI, you can order the Tromp book at Natural Energy Works and save some postage. I'm not saying it's worthless, there is a lot of info there, but Tromp was not a dowser. That just makes the whole thing weird. I think that is what Christopher Hills meant when he talked about people "reporting" on dowsing. They are bystanders and if you don't learn it and experience it, you just don't know. In the Supersensonics book, Hills did most/all of the experiments. It is a first-hand work by an expert. That makes it much higher value and it's why the book is know as the "The Dowser's Bible".

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Tinkerer

Here is another dowsing http://www.tricksterbook.com/ArticlesOnline/Dowsing.htm

Tinkerer

Hi Tinkerer,
This is an interesting report. It is a review of the testing methods used by researchers to ascertain whether dowsing works, written by George Hanson, another non-dowsing researcher. It appears he was researching only the methods others used to test dowsing in some notable tests conducted over past decades.

While some may consider his writings to be weird, I think this is an excellent report. He saves us the time of looking up all of the published dowsing tests and determining which ones were notable. Then he analyzes the procedures used in the tests to determine how valid results can be considered by the standards of the Society for Physical Research. He also addresses human physiological senses that may come into play with dowsers. I am reading a lot of things that I don't normally consider when listening to the usual debates about dowsing that we read in this forum.

His conclusions seem to be the same as what I think about dowsing without doing all the painstaking research he did to arrive at those conclusions. I too would like to see any dowser locate a hidden object with their dowsing apparatus in a manner where precautions are taken to avoid sloppy experimental testing procedures. Simple double-blind testing that does not leave clues for a person to guess where the hidden object is would work.


Maybe the most propagandically significant thing I learned when reading this paper was the meaning of the word "debunker".
I see this word used in the second page of the report where Hanson writes:

"Debunkers claim that dowsers are little more than practical geologists".

So skeptics were wrong all along about "Debunker" not being a word. It is a noun used to describe a person who debunks.
I suppose anyone who uses this word as a verb just doesn't have a very clear understanding of English grammar.

But then, when I use words like "propagandically", I suppose I don't know English grammar so well either.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Mike(Mont)]

I am extremely sensitive to anyone trying to push any religion on me. I did not sense that in the Supersensonics book. And I don't feel it has anything much "new age" in it. Yes, Hills discusses some teachings of yoga that relate to dowsing because yoga has known about it for thousands of years. He shows how the human body can become an antenna. Even their "scientific method" was more demanding than what is used today.

[Mike(Mont)]

I think it is disgusting the way Hills is treated around here. He dedicated a large part of his life to helping others. He donated millions of dollars to charities. And you wonder why I say skepticism is a psychological disorder.

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

He donated millions of dollars to charities.

And how do they earn all those millions? By dowsing?

Charity is only a social hypocrisy. By charity unjust and rich people feel that they have washed their dirty hands and sinful soul.