Anyone else able to divine for water

pedigree 6 wrote: »

Who in their right mind would look into this?
To do so would be scientific suicide.

Scientists investigate unpopular topics all the time. The only way to commit scientific suicide is to make a claim without backing it up, or worse, to falsify data. Supporting an unpopular claim with good new evidence isn't suicide, it's a ticket to extra grants, high impact publications and possibly awards. Everyone wants to be the revolutionary scientist, the disruptor. Incremental findings that fill in the details of previous findings, supporting the status quo- that's noble work, but unlikely to send your scientific career skywards.

So, putting motive aside for a moment, there's the awkward matter that scientists have investigated this, whatever their reasons were. They've don so lots of times. They just haven't produced any results that dowsers want to accept.

runawaybishop wrote: »

I guess we should just take your completely unverifiable word for it so? 50% of your test subject didn't find anything and 50% were 10% away, sounds like pure chance tbh.

You have a perfect opportunity to record what you found but didn't, i can only assume that is because you are exaggerating your positive results.

No, it's because my test subjects were here for a completely different reason which took priority over trying to demonstrate something to someone (several someones) who are determined to reject any suggestion that their cock-eyed interpretation of an insufficiently explained phenomenon might be even more ludicrous than the notion that some people can reliably find channels of electrical and water current.

runawaybishop wrote: »

I guess we should just take your completely unverifiable word for it so?

It's verifiable - why don't you come over and take part in a future test? And we'll make sure we video it.

_Brian wrote: »

I was curious too and googled the electricity from pipes in Canada.
They are installing in-line hydroelectricity generators in the pipe network.

http://www.hydroworld.com/articles/2014/11/halifax-water-generates-power-from-a-32-kw-in-pipe-small-hydroelectric-system.html

No snake oil there.

Sure how could that work? Surely the main had to be pressurised with a pump or similar to begin with and then they're just taking the energy out of the fluid? If it was sufficiently pressurised coming out of the ground then yeah there'd be something in it. What pressure is water out of a well normally?

Found out today I can divine, but I only have it in my right hand. I could find the run of a water pipe in a big lawn.

Say my name wrote: »

What did you use?

2 welding rods, bent at 90 degs.

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

2 welding rods, bent at 90 degs.

Try two bits of light electric fencing wire, cut the same length and bent in the same place and see if it's any difference.

Nobelium wrote: »

that's because you knew/think it was there, that's how 'divining' works

I didn't know where it was. That's the whole point.

patsy_mccabe wrote:

2 welding rods, bent at 90 degs.

Go get a whiththorn slip In a y shape

Twill wreck yer arms

patsy_mccabe wrote: »

Found out today I can divine, but I only have it in my right hand. I could find the run of a water pipe in a big lawn.

Welcome to the wonderfull world of dowsing. Been doing it for many years now after being taught it by an old fella. Real handy for locating water pipes/underground streams or electric cables. Don't really know how it works - i suppose it must be some sort of extra sensory function that hasn't yet been identified by Science.
A.Einstien, a keen dowser,once said - "I know very well that many scientists consider dowsing as a type of ancient superstition. According to my conviction, this is however unjustified. The dowsing rod is a single instrument which shows the reaction of the human nervous system to certain factors which are unknown to us at this time."

If a person can walk into the site of a house and locate the run of the water pipe without knowing where it is in advance, then that's proof enough for me. My brother did that for a neighbour and he dug down and found the pipes exactly where he said they were.

alps wrote: »

It absolutely, definitely, without any doubt in the world...works...


For some....

But savage handy to be able to do...

It works for 4 out of 5 people it’s actually more unusual to find someone that can’t do it.

Starchasers wrote: »

I work for ESB Networks and I divine myself. I’d normally divine with two copper rods and confirm it with the cat& genny if I’m not uncovering it myself. What I can do the last few year is to make up your mind in advance is it a water pipe etc you want to find, it will ignore all electricity pipes. I’ve even found an underground aluminum service of two aluminum conductor ms while ignoring the water pipes and the cables containing copper. I don’t know how it works, I just know that it does!

Its all about focusing on the target and the clarity of your questiong. For instance - if you were dowsing for a well it would be pointless 'looking' for just water, because there is wet/dampness everywhere beneath the surface BUT looking for a potable water source that can provide a flow rate suitable for its intended usage etc will yield more accurate results. Once the position of the target has been established, the depth at which it lies beneath the surface can also be determined by various methods such as the Bishops Rule.

wayoutwest wrote: »

Welcome to the wonderfull world of dowsing. Been doing it for many years now after being taught it by an old fella. Real handy for locating water pipes/underground streams or electric cables."

There are two very separate issues here - the location of water pipes and the location of groundwater.

The location of pipes may have some scientific basis to it, moreso through ideomotor effects rather than electromagnetics or similar.

Localised underground 'streams' aren't really a thing though - just an outdated term used by those straining to apply overground features to what they can't see. If the prevailing geology and topography is favourable for shallow groundwater production, groundwater is typically both close to stagnant, and widespread. If a dowser finds shallow groundwater on one location, it's very very likely to be found all over the same field - allowing for topography obviously.

There's probably a mixture of chancers and genuine practitioners out there - much like the rest of the country!

wayoutwest wrote: »

What would be the point of explaining the finer details of a process that you believe doesn't exist and think is pure nonsense? Google - Bishops Rule dowsing- IF you are interested.

Ahh yes, straight from bluffers and blaggers 101 training.
When someone asks questions get narky and say you wouldn’t beleive anyway. 🙄

At least you didn’t say “you wouldn’t understand” or “god”, they’re other gems.

Graces7 wrote: »

... taught by a well known water diviner. Not tried it since as no need... maybe later.

Out of interest, what was the diviner's method of teaching?

Have two relatives built next to each other and each drilled their own well as per planning, at the same time, same driller. One got a good water source at 80ft the other 60ft away was at 250ft.

Water John wrote: »

Have two relatives built next to each other and each drilled their own well as per planning, at the same time, same driller. One got a good water source at 80ft the other 60ft away was at 250ft.

Probably had to go to bedrock to find a productive fracture