Dowsing by "Albert Einstein"

[Geo]

Hi.
I have read this

"I know very well that many scientists consider dowsing as they do astrology, as a type of ancient superstition. According to my conviction this is, unjustified. The dowsing rod is a simple instrument which shows the uncanny reaction of the human nervous system to certain factors which are unknown to us at this time." Albert Einstein.

If this is true then maybe the pseudosceptics have a big problem.......

Regards

Ref.... http://soulsearchers.spheresoflight....p?page=dowsing

[Dedevil]

I am sure AE had more knowledge on the subject. And pointed towards the nervous system "electrical" but he was busy on other topics
pseudosceptics are just religiously biased and uneducated or educated towards their own religion belief. Like JP they are a BRICK IN THE WALL. Put them up against someones ideas like Steven Hawkings who argues with scientific evidence that GOD did not make the universe and you get a real discussion with them not having a leg to stand on.
But here we are lower down the food chain.

rgds

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi.
I have read this

"I know very well that many scientists consider dowsing as they do astrology, as a type of ancient superstition. According to my conviction this is, unjustified. The dowsing rod is a simple instrument which shows the uncanny reaction of the human nervous system to certain factors which are unknown to us at this time." Albert Einstein.

If this is true then maybe the pseudosceptics have a big problem.......

Regards

This is true, Geo, except presumption that "certain factors are unknown".
Certain factors are mostly already known.

Read, par example, explanation about "certain factors" here:

http://www.longrangelocators.com/for...4&postcount=14

[Geo]

Originally Posted by WM6

This is true, Geo, except presumption that "certain factors are unknown".
Certain factors are mostly already known.

Read, par example, explanation about "certain factors" here:

http://www.longrangelocators.com/for...4&postcount=14

....and what about the "ideomotor" who says some sceptics????

Regards

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Geo

Hi.
I have read this

"I know very well that many scientists consider dowsing as they do astrology, as a type of ancient superstition. According to my conviction this is, unjustified. The dowsing rod is a simple instrument which shows the uncanny reaction of the human nervous system to certain factors which are unknown to us at this time." Albert Einstein.

If this is true then maybe the pseudosceptics have a big problem.......

Regards

Ref.... http://soulsearchers.spheresoflight....p?page=dowsing

See question 5 ->
http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...nfo/lrl_qa.dat

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Geo

....and what about the "ideomotor" who says some sceptics????

Regards

"Ideomotor" is the same things as AE "shows the uncanny reaction of the human nervous system", saying by other words only.

Trigger for those "ideomotor" can be outer (environment marks) or inner (your conscious, or real info where target is buried).

[Fred]

I see no contradiction in this phrase even if it is from him... Einstein also said that nothing can travel faster than light, but man is building a prototype engine that will allow us to do it, not breaking any of his laws, distorting space (and time).
Nowadays, it i obvious that the nervous system IS involved, together with our mind, by making dowsing work as we "expect" to do ....
By the way, Nostradamus said a lot of thing so obscures, that we can now freely interpret them as being true and associate them to real events.

...Just like random beeping

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

See question 5 ->
http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/page...nfo/lrl_qa.dat

Question 5 don't prove anything....

[Geo]

Originally Posted by WM6

"Ideomotor" is the same things as AE "shows the uncanny reaction of the human nervous system", saying by other words only.

Trigger for those "ideomotor" can be outer (environment marks) or inner (your conscious, or real info where target is buried).

Sceptics believes that it is only inner....

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Geo

Sceptics believes that it is only inner....

"Ideomotor" works inner in your nervous system (that control your body movement), but trigger that shutted "ideomotor" to work, can be inner or outer or combined.

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Geo

Question 5 don't prove anything....

Nor does hearsay and Chinese whispers.

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Fred

By the way, Nostradamus said a lot of thing so obscures, that we can now freely interpret them as being true and associate them to real events.

...Just like random beeping

Otherwise known as selective memory.

[Fred]

Yes, and when someone has a beautiful dream (or belief, like "lrl is working" for example ) , it is easier find reasons to keep believing, than to accept a harder reality, which requires some some courage.
Searching for technical evidence (like double blind tests) are also seen like a threat to this dream.
In Matrix for example, some would have refused to take the pill that takes you to the real world

[Geo]

You never will understand!!!!! because you don't like to understand. Double blind tests says nothing for me. For me if the LRL has 20...30% success then it is special. I"ll go out for T.H 10 times and i"ll find twice something expensive. Why i must look for "double blind tests" if i make my job and without it???

[Geo]

As imagined before ι open this issue. The pseudosceptics pulled trashy Einstein, while they have the correct answer
Probably those years, Einstein does not know the double-blind test

Regards

[Fred]

Geo, i am not saying it doesn´t works for you, and i (am happy if it does!)
What i say is there is -absolutely- nothing that proves it really works, after all this time.
And don´t you think that , if something so simple like detecting a metal at some distance, really happened, i could not be proven easily?

You don´t seem to like controversy: I like it ! Most of us learn from it...

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Geo

The pseudosceptics pulled trashy Einstein, while they have the correct answer

Everything is relative, relativistic theory inclusive.

http://home.comcast.net/~xtxinc/mileva.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativ...iority_dispute

Originally Posted by Geo

Double blind tests says nothing for me. For me if the LRL has 20...30% success then it is special.

Geo, my special LRL middle finger has at least 20 - 30% success on most historic terrain. Even under double blind test on such terrain.

But my special middle finger can not pass artificial prepared double blind test. As your LRL can't.

What is the moral of this story ...?

[Fred]

Originally Posted by WM6

But my special middle finger can not pass artificial prepared double blind test. As your LRL can't.
What is the moral of this story ...?

Also, just like some secret frequencies used in LRL´s are claimed to get strong reaction from distant buried metals, if you use your middle finger it in the presence of policeman it will get almost 100% success or reaction.

[WM6]

Originally Posted by Fred

Also, just like some secret frequencies used in LRL´s are claimed to get strong reaction from distant buried metals, if you use your middle finger it in the presence of policeman it will get almost 100% success or reaction.

Except if policeman is double blind.

[Qiaozhi]

Originally Posted by Geo

You never will understand!!!!! because you don't like to understand. Double blind tests says nothing for me. For me if the LRL has 20...30% success then it is special. I"ll go out for T.H 10 times and i"ll find twice something expensive. Why i must look for "double blind tests" if i make my job and without it???

This is why double-blind tests are so important. Otherwise, how can you be certain that 20%-30% success rate is any better than guessing? The answer is, you cannot know for certain by using subjective methods. These are simply too open to unconscious bias on the part of the tester.

The bottom line is, if it fails a double-blind test then it doesn't work. It's pure fantasy.

[Dedevil]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

This is why double-blind tests are so important. Otherwise, how can you be certain that 20%-30% success rate is any better than guessing? The answer is, you cannot know for certain by using subjective methods. These are simply too open to unconscious bias on the part of the tester.

The bottom line is, if it fails a double-blind test then it doesn't work. It's pure fantasy.

The double blinded test was designed around human dowsing. The 20- 30% rate was just the old scam. This is the NEW bottom line PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS AND BRING ON THE TEST. I have a divining device that will smash through your pathetic tests. Bring it on! But dont forget your wallet.

[Dedevil]

I can see this conversation taking us back 4-5 years.
Should i repost the thread about monkeys?
Where is the Hung when you need him.?

[J_Player]

Originally Posted by Dedevil

The double blinded test was designed around human dowsing. The 20- 30% rate was just the old scam. This is the NEW bottom line PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS AND BRING ON THE TEST. I have a divining device that will smash through your pathetic tests. Bring it on! But dont forget your wallet.

It's already been done.
The money was there,
The best dowsers in Australia were there,
The TV stations were there to make sure no cheating.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqoYrSd94kA

If you got something that works, then contact them.
The money is ready and waiting for anything that works.


Best wishes,
J_P

[Geo]

Originally Posted by Qiaozhi

This is why double-blind tests are so important. Otherwise, how can you be certain that 20%-30% success rate is any better than guessing? The answer is, you cannot know for certain by using subjective methods. These are simply too open to unconscious bias on the part of the tester.

The bottom line is, if it fails a double-blind test then it doesn't work. It's pure fantasy.

When you will see a true dowser you will understand. Until then you will be a simple "...sceptic".

Regards

[matrix]

Originally Posted by Dedevil

I am sure AE had more knowledge on the subject. And pointed towards the nervous system "electrical" but he was busy on other topics

I think AE was Contemporary busy on everything Environment such elementary particles , gravity, astronomy, relativity ,newtons laws ,... and all of he was pointed on is Correlate with lrls. and no bothy can show this idea is Contrary.
best wishes