Dowsing By Edge

[edge]

Dear Sirs,
I am willing to take the test for dowsing again as James said that he can send people to the field to test me the last time I tested.
I knew then as now that one set of tests is not scientifically viable.
Many need to be done.
The test will take place in Hayfork California.
The tests will be done by the J.R.E.F. team the exact same way as done in the office with the exception of the following.
1. The containers will be plastic Folgers coffee cans, the 11-oz. version. Red with black lids. You can bring your own or use the ones I have.
2. The tests will be conducted in the park or a particular bank in the creek that will be exposed and dry at a certain time of the year, around the end of August. I prefer the park but that option is open to me. One of two places here in town.
3. The target will be black sands, both magnetic and non magnetic, gold, lead, platinum, mercury coated gold, iron and what ever else is in the black sands. This is what is found in the creek with the gold.
4. It will fill any one of the containers.
5. No one in the field, where the containers are set up will reach into they’re pockets at any time. I will have an observer to make sure no one tampers with the area that the tests are being done at when the tests are being done, because anyone can salt the ground with any metals and then I will get false readings.
6. The J.R.E.F. has the right to check with any scanner, metal detector, or any other detector that there is nothing in the ground to aid me in the challenge.
7. I may do five tries one day and five tries the next if I feel that I must stop if overwhelmed with the impute that I feel.
8. I do not want to know any correct or incorrect hits till the test is over.
9. I will hit 50% correct hits, but I will hope to do 70% at least, but we’ll stay with what we know here right now and that’s 50%.
10. You can use the information any way you want, but not the theories that are to come from this when I win, those are mine.
11. You guys are so sure that this is a loosing proposition that you should have no problems with this.
12. J.R.E.F. will pay for the testers motel and gas expenses.
Under Article 3, the applicant allows all his test data to be used by the Foundation in any way Mr. Randi may choose. That means that Mr. Randi can pick and chose the data at will and decide what to do with it and what verdict to pronounce on it. Under Article 7, the applicant surrenders all rights to legal action against the Foundation, or Mr. Randi, no matter what emotional, professional or financial injury he may consider he has sustained. Thus even if Mr. Randi comes to a conclusion different from that reached by his judges and publicly denounces the test, the applicant would have no redress. The Foundation and Mr. Randi own all the data. Mr. Randi can claim that the judges were fooled. The implicit accusation of fraud would leave the challenger devoid of remedy.
13. Get rid of article 3 if I WIN! Do we have a deal? Dates for the test are your chose as long as it’s before the rainy season that starts about the end of October. So between August and October.

The foundation does not own all the data that comes from theory. The foundation can only use data that pertains to the test............Not theory. I will put this letter in the million-dollar challenge thread. So we can discuss it there.
14. When the protocol is agreed upon I will send in the application.
Mike Guska

THIS LETTER HAS BEEN SENT.

[Psiload]

Dear Sirs,
I am willing to take the test for dowsing again as James said that he can send people to the field to test me the last time I tested.
I knew then as now that one set of tests is not scientifically viable.
Many need to be done.
The test will take place in Hayfork California.
The tests will be done by the J.R.E.F. team the exact same way as done in the office with the exception of the following.
1. The containers will be plastic Folgers coffee cans, the 11-oz. version. Red with black lids. You can bring your own or use the ones I have.
2. The tests will be conducted in the park or a particular bank in the creek that will be exposed and dry at a certain time of the year, around the end of August. I prefer the park but that option is open to me. One of two places here in town.
3. The target will be black sands, both magnetic and non magnetic, gold, lead, platinum, mercury coated gold, iron and what ever else is in the black sands. This is what is found in the creek with the gold.
4. It will fill any one of the containers.
5. No one in the field, where the containers are set up will reach into they’re pockets at any time. I will have an observer to make sure no one tampers with the area that the tests are being done at when the tests are being done, because anyone can salt the ground with any metals and then I will get false readings.
6. The J.R.E.F. has the right to check with any scanner, metal detector, or any other detector that there is nothing in the ground to aid me in the challenge.
7. I may do five tries one day and five tries the next if I feel that I must stop if overwhelmed with the impute that I feel.
8. I do not want to know any correct or incorrect hits till the test is over.
9. I will hit 50% correct hits, but I will hope to do 70% at least, but we’ll stay with what we know here right now and that’s 50%.
10. You can use the information any way you want, but not the theories that are to come from this when I win, those are mine.
11. You guys are so sure that this is a loosing proposition that you should have no problems with this.
12. J.R.E.F. will pay for the testers motel and gas expenses.
Under Article 3, the applicant allows all his test data to be used by the Foundation in any way Mr. Randi may choose. That means that Mr. Randi can pick and chose the data at will and decide what to do with it and what verdict to pronounce on it. Under Article 7, the applicant surrenders all rights to legal action against the Foundation, or Mr. Randi, no matter what emotional, professional or financial injury he may consider he has sustained. Thus even if Mr. Randi comes to a conclusion different from that reached by his judges and publicly denounces the test, the applicant would have no redress. The Foundation and Mr. Randi own all the data. Mr. Randi can claim that the judges were fooled. The implicit accusation of fraud would leave the challenger devoid of remedy.
13. Get rid of article 3 if I WIN! Do we have a deal? Dates for the test are your chose as long as it’s before the rainy season that starts about the end of October. So between August and October.

The foundation does not own all the data that comes from theory. The foundation can only use data that pertains to the test............Not theory. I will put this letter in the million-dollar challenge thread. So we can discuss it there.
14. When the protocol is agreed upon I will send in the application.
Mike Guska

THIS LETTER HAS BEEN SENT. Now for the big question...

Have you actually done what you're planning to do, or are you going to wing it like you did last time?

[edge]

I have hit 50%, the rest I have to check yet as discussed in seeing is believing thread.
I figure I have some time to better my results in one of two spots.

I tried the other day with out dowsing and got four specks verses looking for it using the dowsing technique, at which point is a huge advantage.

The last time I dowsed, the other day it produced just about a half an ounce.

Some times you have to wing it, I was there to learn what I needed to learn, even though I failed, It made me understand that I was right about neutral ground and placement of targets in a neutral area, much better results.

My theories on this subject are mine ....... They ,J.R.E.F. can change anything they want.
What I ask for is pretty understandable.

[edge]

Jeff Wag please use this address to dowsing4gold@yahoo.com
Or [email]dowsing4gold@hotmail.com or p.m. me here.
I'm going to go to camp mode soon.

[Yukon]

Edge,

You're dowsing for gold??

[roger]

#12 is a no-go, and you know it Edge. The testee assumes all costs, it's in the rules.

Also, I'm kind of unimpressed that you can tell that one coffee can is filled to the top with sand while the rest are empty, but I guess it only matters if JREF would be impressed by it or not. I can think of several ways you could unconsciously detect which can had the sand in it.

[Ririon]

Determining if a plastic Folger's can is full or empty when it is sitting on the ground and you can walk right up to it is trivial and non-paranormal. James Randi or Uri Geller :blush: would get it right about 100 % of the time. 50 % is what is expected by chance, unless you have many cans to choose from and have to pick one. (The OP doesn't specify that.)

(Coffee-advice: Folger's is not all that good.)

[Yukon]

I tried the other day with out dowsing and got four specks verses looking for it using the dowsing technique, at which point is a huge advantage.

The last time I dowsed, the other day it produced just about a half an ounce.

I wrote a critical piece on water witching by water district operators and cited a hydrogeologist who stated that "the natural explanation of 'successful' water dowsing is that in many areas, water would be hard to miss!"

You're dowsing for gold, right? And you're dowsing for gold in creeks in California, right? Didn't they have a gold rush in California a few years back? Kinda hard to miss, don't you think?

What am I missing here??

[Dumb All Over]

Edge, have you submitted an application? If you have not yet, when you do so, do not insist that JREF pay for anything. They will not pay. If you insist that JREF pay for motel and gas expenses, be prepared to have your application rejected.

[Dumb All Over]

Oops, one more thing. You seem to have things backwards. Your application must be submitted before negotiations on protocol can begin. Not the other way around.

[Jeff Wagg]

Please send mail to challenge@randi.org with that information. I'm probably not going to be able to read all these posts, and it's only by chance that I caught this message.

Jeff Wag please use this address to [email]dowsing4gold@yahoo.com
Or dowsing4gold@hotmail.com or p.m. me here.
I'm going to go to camp mode soon.

[TheBoyPaj]

Determining if a plastic Folger's can is full or empty when it is sitting on the ground and you can walk right up to it is trivial and non-paranormal. James Randi or Uri Geller :blush: would get it right about 100 % of the time.

Didn't Geller do pretty much the same thing at Stanford, only with film cans? The supposed method is discussed in "The Truth About Uri Geller".

[petre]

He also seems to be under the impression that there are judges present at tests. Since it seems he's actually taken a preliminary test before, it should seem obvious that this is not the case.

[edge]

Where do you guys come up with all this crap?
Wow!
I'm about to put four people on a bunch, read the thread Seeing is beliveing.
But we have to dive for it, to snipe.
You probably don't know what that is.
I'll let you know how that turns out.

If it's so easy to find try it.

Jeff I did e-mail it.

[gnome]

Note the common misconception that the legal disclaimer allows JREF to refuse to fulfill the agreement. Kinda makes the whole thing pointless if that's so, doesn't it?

[LordoftheLeftHand]

I think it goes without saying, but here goes anyway: I do not represent the JREF; all official challenge related business should be done directly with the JREF.

...
1. The containers will be plastic Folgers coffee cans, the 11-oz. version. Red with black lids. You can bring your own or use the ones I have.
Just curious, why does it have to be that certain brand?

...
9. I will hit 50% correct hits, but I will hope to do 70% at least, but we’ll stay with what we know here right now and that’s 50%.

These numbers don't mean anything without more information. Try something like this:

There will be a total of 10 cans. One with the "special" sand and 9 with regular sand. For each run I will make one "guess" at which can has the special sand. Each time the cans will be moved and I will try again. This will be done a total of 10 times. To be considered a successful test, I will correctly identify the can with the "special" sand 50% of the time (at least 5 times out of 10). Anything less will be considered a failure.

I recommend you put a similar substance in the other cans so the "special" sand can not be identified by weight alone. I also recommend that the cans be further concealed (like put in a bag, or something).


...
12. J.R.E.F. will pay for the testers motel and gas expenses.


LOL! You know that is not going to happen!

LLH

[CriticalThanking]

I'm missing something. Is Mike saying that he will detect naturally occurring metals in the sand from the site placed into the cans, or that there will be separate objects (gold, etc) manually placed in the cans along with the native sand?

CT

[Ladewig]

These numbers don't mean anything without more information. Try something like this:

There will be a total of 10 cans. One with the "special" sand and 9 with regular sand. For each run I will make one "guess" at which can has the special sand. Each time the cans will be moved and I will try again. This will be done a total of 10 times. To be considered a successful test, I will correctly identify the can with the "special" sand 50% of the time (at least 5 times out of 10). Anything less will be considered a failure.


LordoftheLeftHand's point is very important.

So, Edge, when you say you have acheived 50% success, you don't mean that you were using two cans and that you picked the correct one half the time, do you?

[TheBoyPaj]

2. The tests will be conducted in the park or a particular bank in the creek that will be exposed and dry at a certain time of the year, around the end of August. I prefer the park but that option is open to me. One of two places here in town.
3. The target will be black sands, both magnetic and non magnetic, gold, lead, platinum, mercury coated gold, iron and what ever else is in the black sands. This is what is found in the creek with the gold.

The target will be something which is lying around all over the test site?

But last time you claimed to be thrown off by gold which was in the room (even though it turned out not to be gold after all). Are you sure you won't be using the same excuse again?

[roger]

LordoftheLeftHand's point is very important.

So, Edge, when you say you have acheived 50% success, you don't mean that you were using two cans and that you picked the correct one half the time, do you?Well, he did say the test setup isthe same as was done during his first preliminary test with Randi, so I'm assuming he means he will achieve 50% under that scenerio. I don't remember the set up, but it was definitely more than 2 targets. Still, a clarification would be nice.

[bjb]

How about adding some sort of a control test? I watched the Randi in Australia video and in the first test, the dowsers were told where the water was before they started dowsing. Naturally, the dowsers all reported strong hits. For the rest of the test, they were not told where the water was and their dowsing was just as good as random chance.

This was important because it prevented them from making excuses for their poor results. How could they get a strong hit if the area was 'contaminated' or if the sunspots were interfering with their abilities? If that were true, they shouldn't have had a strong hit in the demonstration test, nor during the double-blind tests.

I would have like to have seen additional control tests made during the day. This way, the dowsers couldn't claim that their abilities were fading as time went on. One final control test at the end of the day would prevent this sort of excuse from the dowser, or perhaps, the test could be given througout the day to detemine when the dowser gets 'tired'.

I also agree that the dowser will be tested with a set of 10 cans, only one of which contains the target. Also, the number of tests should be large, 50 at least but 100 would be better. edge, you said you could hit 50% but how for how many trials?

[Crossbow]

edge:

Sorry, but I really do not think that JREF will accept your terms.

I can think of several reasons why, but in summary you want to define the test, have JREF pay expenses of the testing, and change the terms of the Challenge if you win. All of these things violate the Challenge.

Therefore, my advice is that you reconsider your application.

[TheBoyPaj]

Well to be fair, one of those things, defining the test, IS the applicant's job.

[Crossbow]

Well to be fair, one of those things, defining the test, IS the applicant's job.

Not entirely.

The test has to be something both parties (the Claimant and JREF) agree to.

Simply having the Claimant outline the test and then have JREF go along without question or input would not be very wise.

[Spektator]

(snip)
5. No one in the field, where the containers are set up will reach into they’re pockets at any time. I will have an observer to make sure no one tampers with the area that the tests are being done at when the tests are being done, because anyone can salt the ground with any metals and then I will get false readings.(snip)
11. You guys are so sure that this is a loosing proposition that you should have no problems with this.(snip).
On number 5, then the JREF should have an observer to observe your observer to make sure your observer does not make any surreptitious marks that would indicate the target container.

On number 11, since you are so sure this is a winning proposition, why not put up a couple of thousand dollars on your side? If you fail, it goes to a charity.

[NoZed Avenger]

Under Article 3, the applicant allows all his test data to be used by the Foundation in any way Mr. Randi may choose. That means that Mr. Randi can pick and chose the data at will and decide what to do with it and what verdict to pronounce on it. Under Article 7, the applicant surrenders all rights to legal action against the Foundation, or Mr. Randi, no matter what emotional, professional or financial injury he may consider he has sustained. Thus even if Mr. Randi comes to a conclusion different from that reached by his judges and publicly denounces the test, the applicant would have no redress. The Foundation and Mr. Randi own all the data. Mr. Randi can claim that the judges were fooled. The implicit accusation of fraud would leave the challenger devoid of remedy.

I have no comment on your proposed protocol, except to say good luck.

But this interpretation of the Rules language is incorrect. The waiver specifically states that it will not affect the awarding of the prize money. This language is merely to prevent lawsuits on a claim that an unsuccessful test (if it fails) damaged the reputation of the applicant, for example. It also protects the foundation (in my opinion) if an applicant hurts himself in the test and then wants to sue.

You can probably have the JREF confirm that the waiver will not affect the awarding of the prize, and that Randi cannot "overrule" the results in the way you are concerned about.

N/A

[edge]

Roger got it right!

My concern is with only rule 3. If I fail it will be like before and Randi will roast me, if I pass that is something else. All other knowledge that comes from this and or theory are credit to myself alone.....

It can be any container as long as it's plastic. The Folgers cans are thick.
Maxwell House will do.

The test has to be something both parties (the Claimant and JREF) agree to.

Boy Paj and Crossbow are both right.

Skeptator said,
On number 5, then the JREF should have an observer to observe your observer to make sure your observer does not make any surreptitious marks that would indicate the target container.

On number 11, since you are so sure this is a winning proposition, why not put up a couple of thousand dollars on your side? If you fail, it goes to a charity.

My observer can be on the other side of the park with binoculars. He can be scanned for electronics, there that ends that.

He doesn’t have to be near them, just close enough to say that some one has cheated. Just in case.

I'm not saying that I'm giving anything away if you prove me wrong, I have my own inefficiencies to deal with, like when I can't get to the gold for what ever reasons and knowing it's there. Doing the labor and still can’t get it.
But if you want to take a bet in the field I’ll be glad to oblige. I’ll bet every time I go I’ll get something, and you won’t, every time. In other words you won’t get anything and I will. It’s that hard to do. It doesn’t have to be here either.
But here I have proven this with friends that go with me mining so be forewarned.
You know what happens next? I let them dig or snipe in my areas and then they get color.
My skeptic friend thanked me for allowing him to actually get some,
I was taken a back. He’s’ a skeptic an atheist and a sicentolagist.

As far as charity I have given some thought to that.
Christian Children foundation and of course there's J.R.E.F. .

I figured if I win I would donate 100,000.00 or so, plus a major tithe.

I would give away another 100,000.00.Some of that to J.R.E.F.. Hell by the time I was done I would be broke again Ha haha.

Then I would have to research more and come up with something viable as theory and working model.
Or just retire.
I’ll let you geniuses’ figure out what I have proven if I win.

Ashless kinda knows what I’m talking about.
It’s not just about the first million.
But if it is, it won’t matter for me at that point.

You know what’s really cool though is I get to mine and actually get a chance at a million.
I won’t be here in Ca. forever, kinda Miss Fl.. Gas was way cheaper every where you go there’s a beach.

I’m still having a blast.

[Pyrrho]

3. The target will be black sands, both magnetic and non magnetic, gold, lead, platinum, mercury coated gold, iron and what ever else is in the black sands. This is what is found in the creek with the gold.
Am I correct that what this means is that you'll be dowsing for "black sands", and if those sands contain anything at all, you win? You've cast a pretty wide net there...

What's to prevent you from salting the location in advance? Let's say, with the grit that collects along street curbs--which grit contains metals such as magnetic particles, platinum, mercury, iron, etc. as a result of automobile traffic...

My point is, your protocol lacks proper controls.

[roger]

Am I correct that what this means is that you'll be dowsing for "black sands", and if those sands contain anything at all, you win? You've cast a pretty wide net there...

What's to prevent you from salting the location in advance? Let's say, with the grit that collects along street curbs--which grit contains metals such as magnetic particles, platinum, mercury, iron, etc. as a result of automobile traffic...

My point is, your protocol lacks proper controls.No, there will be 10 (or however many) coffee cans, 9 of them empty, one with black sands. Edge claims he will find that full coffee can 50% of the time.

I'm completely unimpressed, as I think you can potentially do the same without paranormal powers, the difference between a full and empty can being pretty large. I'm thinking bulging sides, no movement during wind, their response to footfalls, light transmittal, heck maybe even sound transmittal. It'd need to be tightened up, but the fundamental idea is sound, as far as I can tell.

[Pyrrho]

No, there will be 10 (or however many) coffee cans, 9 of them empty, one with black sands. Edge claims he will find that full coffee can 50% of the time.

I'm completely unimpressed, as I think you can potentially do the same without paranormal powers, the difference between a full and empty can being pretty large. I'm thinking bulging sides, no movement during wind, their response to footfalls, light transmittal, heck maybe even sound transmittal. It'd need to be tightened up, but the fundamental idea is sound, as far as I can tell.
Ah, ok, it's a variation on the old "film can" trick, as seen on TV.

Randi won't fall for that one.

[Spektator]

Fill the other nine cans with ordinary playground sand.

[Curnir]

or place the cans under numbered cardboard boxes.

That also elliminates the "possibillity" of 'marked cans'

[edge]

The plastic is pretty strong, they'll figure it out. Curnirs got a good idea.

[Tricky]

Dear Sirs,
I am willing to take the test for dowsing again as James said that he can send people to the field to test me the last time I tested.
I knew then as now that one set of tests is not scientifically viable.
Had you succeeded you would have crowed that the test was scientifically viable. You'll do it if you succeed this time. But you won't succeed.

Many need to be done.
The test will take place in Hayfork California.
The tests will be done by the J.R.E.F. team the exact same way as done in the office with the exception of the following.
1. The containers will be plastic Folgers coffee cans, the 11-oz. version. Red with black lids. You can bring your own or use the ones I have.
How many containers? Ten? That makes a big difference in the scoring, you know.

Make sure they don't have gold paint on them.

3. The target will be black sands, both magnetic and non magnetic, gold, lead, platinum, mercury coated gold, iron and what ever else is in the black sands. This is what is found in the creek with the gold.
This is NOT like the previous test, because you used gold items (and a quartz crystal and other stuff) as targets. But I'm sure the JREF won't care what you use for a target.

5. No one in the field, where the containers are set up will reach into they’re pockets at any time. I will have an observer to make sure no one tampers with the area that the tests are being done at when the tests are being done, because anyone can salt the ground with any metals and then I will get false readings.
As before, you will be allowed to dowse the field before your test to ascertain that it is "clean" of dowsing readings. If you're worried about cheaters, make sure you have an observer by the video camera.

6. The J.R.E.F. has the right to check with any scanner, metal detector, or any other detector that there is nothing in the ground to aid me in the challenge.
In the previous dowsing challenges, that has not been necessary. They set it up so you can't cheat, even if you knew how.

7. I may do five tries one day and five tries the next if I feel that I must stop if overwhelmed with the impute that I feel.
I'm not sure they'll allow this. However, if you wish to cut short the number of tests, simply increase the number of false targets. If you can find your target in 100 potential targets, that will require many fewer trials than if you just used ten targets. As always though, I do not speak for JREF.

8. I do not want to know any correct or incorrect hits till the test is over.
No one will know. That's how double blind tests work. Speaking of which, you still haven't described how this test would be set up as a double-blind test.

9. I will hit 50% correct hits, but I will hope to do 70% at least, but we’ll stay with what we know here right now and that’s 50%.
Out of ten tests on ten targets each? That's a minimum of five correct in selecting the correct one out of ten targets? I'm sure this will be satisfactory. Law of average says you only get one out of ten correct. Good luck will get you two. Incredible luck will get you three. If you can do four, then you probably have enough to pass the preliminary test. In the final test, you will likely have to do many more tests though, assuming you make it to the final test, which I strongly doubt.

10. You can use the information any way you want, but not the theories that are to come from this when I win, those are mine.
You don't even have to tell anybody your theories. JREF has repeatedly stated that they don't care about your theories, only that you can do what you say. If you can somehow manage not to talk about them, then your secrets are safe.

11. You guys are so sure that this is a loosing proposition that you should have no problems with this.
This is not a part of the protocol, but just a comment. No need to give it a number. But there are a number of gaps in your protocol, primarily how many targets, how it will be double blinded, how you are going to perform the "open" test and probably some others. Thats what you have to work out with JREF once you send in your application.

12. J.R.E.F. will pay for the testers motel and gas expenses.
No they won't. You have been told this time and time again. It is quite clearly stated in rule 6.All of the applicant's expenses such as transportation, accommodation, materials, assistants, and/or all other costs for any persons or procedures incurred in pursuit of the reward, are the sole responsibility of the applicant. Neither the JREF nor JR will bear any of the costs. The testers are giving up their time without compensation. Nobody should have to shell out their own money to feed your delusions.

Under Article 3, the applicant allows all his test data to be used by the Foundation in any way Mr. Randi may choose. That means that Mr. Randi can pick and chose the data at will and decide what to do with it and what verdict to pronounce on it. Under Article 7, the applicant surrenders all rights to legal action against the Foundation, or Mr. Randi, no matter what emotional, professional or financial injury he may consider he has sustained. Thus even if Mr. Randi comes to a conclusion different from that reached by his judges and publicly denounces the test, the applicant would have no redress. The Foundation and Mr. Randi own all the data. Mr. Randi can claim that the judges were fooled. The implicit accusation of fraud would leave the challenger devoid of remedy.
Completely incorrect. The exact definition of what constitutes a successful test is set out in advance. It is a legally binding contract. You do realize, however, that this is just a preliminary test, right? True, no one has passed a preliminary test yet, but the rules quite clearly state that there must be a final test. The setup would be exactly the same, but you would be required to provide a more statistically significant sample, or for your case, more repetitions. At least that is the way I understand it.

13. Get rid of article 3 if I WIN! Do we have a deal? The foundation does not own all the data that comes from theory. The foundation can only use data that pertains to the test............Not theory. I will put this letter in the million-dollar challenge thread. So we can discuss it there.
That will be a deal killer, Edge. You don't get to change the rules. But remember, that the recordings are to make sure that nobody cheats. You need not reveal any of your "theories" either on the recordings or to anyone. They don't care. In fact, Randi told you this at your first test. The hardest thing for you will be to manage to make yourself shut up about your theories. We know how you love to talk.

Besides, you've discussed lots of them here. It is not as if they are secret.


14. When the protocol is agreed upon I will send in the application.
Mike Guska

THIS LETTER HAS BEEN SENT.
It doesn't work that way. Application first. Protocol afterwards. It states that clearly in the rules. There are a number of problems with your protocol though, so don't expect them to agree to it. Primarily, you seem to be laboring under the delusion that you get to change the rules of the challenge. We'll just add that to your rather long list of delusions.

On the plus side, you will have lots of new excuses and lies about how JREF is afraid to test you. That may make you feel better, but it won't harm JREF. I'm sure they've heard them all before.

[Tricky]

BTW, here is Edge's old dowsing thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=43374)in case anybody is interested.

[westphalia]

My concern is with only rule 3. If I fail it will be like before and Randi will roast me....

Sounds to me like you should submit a challenge based on your ability to predict the future.

....I have my own inefficiencies to deal with....

Yep.

He’s’ a skeptic an atheist and a sicentolagist.

Hmmm.

I figured if I win I would donate 100,000.00 or so, plus a major tithe.

Benny Hinn will be very happy.

I’m still having a blast.

Delusions are great fun sometimes.

[Tricky]

One more thing, Edge. Perhaps you ought to watch this video of the Australia Dowsing Challenge (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7461912885649996034). It's mostly about water dowsing, but does contain some gold dowsing too. It can give you an idea of how these tests are set up.

[roger]

The plastic is pretty strong, they'll figure it out. Curnirs got a good idea.There you go Mike, your being very reasonable. Please realize that JREF never, ever negotiates the contract, and that you cannot either. We really do want to see you tested again, most of us. Don't let this be the sticking point. If you win you will have $1M, which you rightly pointed out, is the tip of the iceberg. The challenge terms are normal and fair - you have to sign pretty much the same thing if you apply for the Guiness book of world records, for example. You get $1M, and JREF gets to publish the results. That's more than fair, you come out WAY ahead. Just go ahead and take the challenge.

[Spektator]

Okay, so specify the total number of containers you'll be using (I assumed 10, nine without a target, one with a target).

A hit consists only of identifying the container with the target. It does NOT consist in identifying a container to the left or right or next to a container with the target.

The containers really ought to be completely identical (I noticed in the grocery store today that some coffee containers are different from others of the same brand--"New Improved Flavor" on some, not on others, and so on). Covering the containers with identical cardboard boxes would do it.

Edge, you know JREF will not change the terms of the challenge whether you win or lose. I'm with Roger--drop that demand.

And, as others have said, send in the application first, then worry about refining the protocol. Good luck!

[Ladewig]

So, Edge, have you been practicing under the same conditions that you hope will be adopted for the challenge?

If you have a friend fill up one can with the special sand and randomly place it (a deck of cards might be a good way of generating a random placement) among the other cans, then you can see how easy or hard it is to hit 50%.

Many applicants forget the very important step of testing themselves under controlled conditions before applying.

[edge]

You get $1M, and JREF gets to publish the results. That's more than fair, you come out WAY ahead. Just go ahead and take the challenge.

If that's the way it is ok.

I test myself all the time I live it, for now.

I'am waiting to hear from Jeff.

[Tricky]

You get $1M, and JREF gets to publish the results. That's more than fair, you come out WAY ahead. Just go ahead and take the challenge.

If that's the way it is ok.

I test myself all the time I live it, for now.

I'am waiting to hear from Jeff.
You haven't described a double blind test yet, so by all appearances your self-testing is pretty much worthless as far as being evidence.

And if you want to hear from JREF, send in you application. They are required to respond to them, even if they are self-deluded woo-woos. They are not required to respond to e-mails from self-deluded woo-woos.

[Ladewig]

I test myself all the time I live it, for now.




Let me be more specific. Do you test yourself IN THE EXACT MANNER that you expect for the challenge?

Do you have SOMEONE ELSE hide the material before you do your special dowsing?

[Tricky]

Let me be more specific. Do you test yourself IN THE EXACT MANNER that you expect for the challenge?

Do you have SOMEONE ELSE hide the material before you do your special dowsing?
And that's only a single blind. For a double blind, no-one who is present when you dowse can know where the target is, lest they inadvertantly give the dowser subtle clues.

It takes three people minimum, a dowser, an observer and a "hider". Here's how it works. While both the dowser and the observer are not present, the third person hides the target using a random number to select which of the positions to hide the target in, then that person records the target locaton and leaves the vicinity before the dowser or observer arrive so that there can be no contact, visual or otherwise between anyone present at the test and the person hiding the target. (Alternatively, you can set up a video camera to use as an observer, provided you don't look at the recording until the test is fully completed).

The dowser identifies what he thinks is the correct target and it is recorded. Then the process is repeated until a statistically valid number of tests are performed. For ease of calculation, ten is the usual number for a preliminary test.

This is similar to what JREF will most likely require. Easy, right?

[GzuzKryzt]

Edge, if Tricky's helpful suggestion still has left you with questions about a proper double-blind set-up, try this video: "James Randi in Australia". http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7461912885649996034

It might also entertain you to a certain amount.

[Ririon]

And that's only a single blind. For a double blind, no-one who is present when you dowse can know where the target is, lest they inadvertantly give the dowser subtle clues.

It takes three people minimum, a dowser, an observer and a "hider". ...
If you are completely honest, and only want to practise your skills or test yourself, you can do it with only one person to assist you.

If I understand correctly, this is how I would suggest a practise or self-test scenario:

Fill One can with target ("black sand"/gold/whatever) and the other (4? 9?) with regular sand that does not interfere with your dowsing.

Get cardboard boxes to hide the cans. Number them.

Your friend places the target under a randomly chosen cardboard box and the regular sand cans under the other ones. He then moves all the cardboard boxes slightly. Obviously you do not peek. :)

You figure out which box contains the target using dowsing, without your friend even watching you.

Take a note of the result. Repeat.

If you can do this significantly better than chance without cheating, you will win the million easily. If you can not, practise more and don't apply until you can. Good luck!

Ririon

[Tricky]

If you are completely honest, and only want to practise your skills or test yourself, you can do it with only one person to assist you.

If I understand correctly, this is how I would suggest a practise or self-test scenario:

Fill One can with target ("black sand"/gold/whatever) and the other (4? 9?) with regular sand that does not interfere with your dowsing.

Get cardboard boxes to hide the cans. Number them.

Your friend places the target under a randomly chosen cardboard box and the regular sand cans under the other ones. He then moves all the cardboard boxes slightly. Obviously you do not peek. :)

You figure out which box contains the target using dowsing, without your friend even watching you.

Take a note of the result. Repeat.

If you can do this significantly better than chance without cheating, you will win the million easily. If you can not, practise more and don't apply until you can. Good luck!

Ririon
You are correct. But that is still a single blind. If you are completely honest, it should be close to the same accuracy as the double blind, but it is so hard to keep from "accidentally" doing something, like nudging the boxes or being imprecise about which box you picked. Perhaps someone else could describe where error might enter.

I believe Edge is being honest about his self-trials, but I do not believe he is capable of acheiving the results he has indicated if the test were double-blinded. I think there is sensory leakage somewhere.

[Ririon]

You are correct. But that is still a single blind. If you are completely honest, it should be close to the same accuracy as the double blind, but it is so hard to keep from "accidentally" doing something, like nudging the boxes or being imprecise about which box you picked. Perhaps someone else could describe where error might enter.

I believe Edge is being honest about his self-trials, but I do not believe he is capable of acheiving the results he has indicated if the test were double-blinded. I think there is sensory leakage somewhere.
As long as he is honest and writes things down, this setup eliminates accidental "sensory leakage" as you put it. And he doesn't have to bother more than one friend...

But then there is the issue of "cherry-picking". Say he used ten cans. One day he gets it right 15 % of the time. "Great, let me get on the forum to brag". The next day he gets it right 5 % of the time. "Oh, I wasn't quite on form today. And those pesky solar flares are messing with me. I'll disregard that." And so on.

This is another way for him to cheat himself. If he averages over his good days (or good sessions) he will score consistently better than the expected 10 %. The JREF will do no such thing, of course.

[Tricky]

As long as he is honest and writes things down, this setup eliminates accidental "sensory leakage" as you put it. And he doesn't have to bother more than one friend...

But then there is the issue of "cherry-picking". Say he used ten cans. One day he gets it right 15 % of the time. "Great, let me get on the forum to brag". The next day he gets it right 5 % of the time. "Oh, I wasn't quite on form today. And those pesky solar flares are messing with me. I'll disregard that." And so on.

This is another way for him to cheat himself. If he averages over his good days (or good sessions) he will score consistently better than the expected 10 %. The JREF will do no such thing, of course.
Yeah, but Edge has a great deal of emotional investment in this. It is so great that he lied to Randi at the first test, or at least he changed his story later. He's been caught in several other self-contradictions too. I don't believe he even realizes he's doing it, so deep is his self-deception.

So we know that Edge is capable of being dishonest in testing. That is the reason no single-blind results can be trusted from him. Frankly, history tells us not to trust any results from him without an independant observer.

[Ririon]

Yeah, but Edge has a great deal of emotional investment in this. It is so great that he lied to Randi at the first test, or at least he changed his story later. He's been caught in several other self-contradictions too. I don't believe he even realizes he's doing it, so deep is his self-deception.

So we know that Edge is capable of being dishonest in testing. That is the reason no single-blind results can be trusted from him. Frankly, history tells us not to trust any results from him without an independant observer.
Could not agree more. I would not trust positive dowsing results from anybody without an independant observer. I am just in a constructive and trusting mood today. :)

[Spektator]

You get $1M, and JREF gets to publish the results. That's more than fair, you come out WAY ahead. Just go ahead and take the challenge.

If that's the way it is ok.

I test myself all the time I live it, for now.

I'am waiting to hear from Jeff.
Edge, send in an application and you will hear from Jeff.

[Tricky]

Could not agree more. I would not trust positive dowsing results from anybody without an independant observer. I am just in a constructive and trusting mood today. :)
LOL. What a cool cat you are!:p

[Ririon]

LOL. What a cool cat you are!:p
Thank you. Let me compliment you on a wonderful sig. Especially on this forum.:rr:

[hellaeon]

hmmm if you can find gold so easily, why bother taking the challenge? just find more gold. It seems hard for you understand the test protocols, instead you want to redefine them. Why bother. Just approach a mining company and show them all the gold you find.

Did I read you wrong?

[gnome]

hmmm if you can find gold so easily, why bother taking the challenge? just find more gold. It seems hard for you understand the test protocols, instead you want to redefine them. Why bother. Just approach a mining company and show them all the gold you find.

Did I read you wrong?

Arguing hypothetically, it could be that he seeks recognition of his abilities as real. He could make money working for miners, and still be questioned. Passing the Challenge would go a long way towards recognition of his abilities or technique.

[steenkh]

It is also not a sure thing that the mining companies would give him a million dollars for some emails and a couple of hours' work in the local park.

[Tricky]

It is also not a sure thing that the mining companies would give him a million dollars for some emails and a couple of hours' work in the local park.
True, but if he really could reliably find gold or any number of other minerals, they would hire him at a pretty darn good salary. But very successful mining companies don't use dowsers. I wonder why that is?

[edge]

Tricky said,
Out of ten tests on ten targets each? That's a minimum of five correct in selecting the correct one out of ten targets? I'm sure this will be satisfactory. Law of average says you only get one out of ten correct.


That’s not what happens when you mine, the law of average has nothing to do with it.
My percentage on the creek is way higher.
More like 85% correct in finding a good quantity.
And yes 10 targets in ten tries.
Once open and once closed.
I’ll do the open test one handed.

And you say this,
No they won't. You have been told this time and time again. It is quite clearly stated in rule 6.

Here’s rule 6 All of the applicant's expenses such as transportation, accommodation, materials, assistants, and/or all other costs for any persons or procedures incurred in pursuit of the reward, are the sole responsibility of the applicant. Neither the JREF nor JR will bear any of the costs.

Applicant’s expenses..........

Not J.R.E.F. and if so I’ll need a couple of days into dredging season which starts July 1st. To accomplish their expenses with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?

And besides how could they not afford to travel in order to sell their ideas after all they are willing to give a million away you would think to promote themselves they could afford a motel or a camping trip?

Now if they want to sell their ideas and sell the skeptical news I’m sure they only mean Applicant’s expenses..........
And you say,
The testers are giving up their time without compensation. Nobody should have to shell out their own money to feed your delusions.

Never know who’s delusional and there you go calling names shame on you!
The testers are on the clock any way and getting out of the office is a good thing.

Tricky you act like you work for them, let’s see what they have to say, because I can always get Gary to test me.
I’m sure he could afford a trip from Phoenix since he took an interest.

I can see why you’re so down on the idea of a possibility that this could work being the resident geologist and all. But that’s your problem.

Completely incorrect. The exact definition of what constitutes a successful test is set out in advance. It is a legally binding contract. You do realize, however, that this is just a preliminary test, right? True, no one has passed a preliminary test yet, but the rules quite clearly state that there must be a final test. The setup would be exactly the same, but you would be required to provide a more statistically significant sample, or for your case, more repetitions. At least that is the way I understand it.




Then you don’t understand it, every dowser passes the preliminary test it’s the closed test that is the problem.

That will be a deal killer, Edge. You don't get to change the rules.
It’s more like a clarification of the rules that’s all.

In other words they can have all the news they want but not the credit from the further knowledge or theory’s.


Skeptator said,

Okay, so specify the total number of containers you'll be using (I assumed 10, nine without a target, one with a target).



That’s right.


Ladewig said,

So, Edge, have you been practicing under the same conditions that you hope will be adopted for the challenge?

If you have a friend fill up one can with the special sand and randomly place it (a deck of cards might be a good way of generating a random placement) among the other cans, then you can see how easy or hard it is to hit 50%.

Many applicants forget the very important step of testing themselves under controlled conditions before applying.


Yes I have.
I haven’t forgot.

That’s exactly right Ririon.

gnome said,

Arguing hypothetically, it could be that he seeks recognition of his abilities as real. He could make money working for miners, and still be questioned. Passing the Challenge would go a long way towards recognition of his abilities or technique.


That’s true and besides I work for myself. If I pass this it’s worth more than working for a mining company.

No matter what, you guys are helping me to fill in the holes.

There’s a meadow on a piece of property that I’m trying to talk some one into open pit type operation.
I’ll let you know about this spot.
Never been mined and it’s the best hits on the property.
No cues in a flat meadow, it’s only in one spot that’s worth opening up.
20x40 foot pit, if we get more that a pound we will be successful, I’ll let you know.

hellaeon hmmm if you can find gold so easily, why bother taking the challenge? just find more gold. It seems hard for you understand the test protocols, instead you want to redefine them. Why bother. Just approach a mining company and show them all the gold you find.

Did I read you wrong?

Yes

[case sensitive]

"Then you don’t understand it, every dowser passes the preliminary test it’s the closed test that is the problem."

What??? No one has ever passed the preliminary test. And got to the final test. No dowser ever have done the final test!

[edge]

If I pass this test I'll have my own mining company.
Technically speaking there are better ways to find gold with satellite technology and metal detectors.
But it's not about that.

[case sensitive]

Edge tell us seriously...

How bad has the testresult be before you admit to yourself that it is only ideomotor effect and nothing paranormal? Are you man enough to change your mind?

[Tricky]

That’s not what happens when you mine, the law of average has nothing to do with it.
In mining, no, but that doesn't matter. You are not going to be mining. You are going to be dowsing for known objects. You have to find it a statistically significant number of times. Yeah, the law of averages does actually have something to do with that.

My percentage on the creek is way higher.
More like 85% correct in finding a good quantity.
And yes 10 targets in ten tries.
Once open and once closed.
I’ll do the open test one handed.
If you take the test (which I predict you won't) you will lose. (Also my prediction.) Prove me wrong.

Here’s rule 6 All of the applicant's expenses such as transportation, accommodation, materials, assistants, and/or all other costs for any persons or procedures incurred in pursuit of the reward, are the sole responsibility of the applicant. Neither the JREF nor JR will bear any of the costs.

Applicant's expenses...
You really need to work on your reading comprehension skills. ALL expenses are "applicant's expenses".

Not J.R.E.F. and if so I’ll need a couple of days into dredging season which starts July 1st. To accomplish their expenses with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?
July 1st is one month away. You haven't even sent in your application yet. You have asked that the rules be changed for you. You have not described an appropriate double-blind protocol. I sense another of your excuses hurtling toward us.


And besides how could they not afford to travel in order to sell their ideas after all they are willing to give a million away you would think to promote themselves they could afford a motel or a camping trip?
They are not selling their ideas. They make no claims. They are testing your claims. They are not promoting themselves. We don't even know who "they" are.

One of the reasons these tests take time to set up is because JREF has to round up volunteers in the area to test you and then find a time when all of you can be there. I'm actually a volunteer for tests in my area, but you are not in my area. However, if you would agree to pay for my plane ticket, I'd come out and help test you, as long as JREF agreed. I wouldn't even charge you for lodging.

Never know who’s delusional and there you go calling names shame on you!
Yes, I call you delusional, but it is based on evidence. You failed the first test but instead of accepting the obvious, you lied, you made excuses, and you continue to believe. That is the hallmark of delusional behavior. And don't even get me started about your UFO delusions.

The testers are on the clock any way and getting out of the office is a good thing.
You are on the clock. Nothing will happen until you send in your application. Tick... tick... tick...

Tricky you act like you work for them, let’s see what they have to say, because I can always get Gary to test me.
I have said repeatedly and I say again that I do not represent JREF. My opinions are my own. But I am capable of understanding the rules and what a double blind test is. And my bet is the JREF won't have anything to say unless you send in the application. Get that through your thick skull.

Maybe Gary can test you, but can he give you a million dollars?

I can see why you’re so down on the idea of a possibility that this could work being the resident geologist and all. But that’s your problem.Are you kidding? I'd LOVE for dowsing to work. It would make my job so much easier. But if it worked, mining and other types of geological companies would hire dowsers. They're in it to make money and a shortcut to money is something they'd welcome. Yet they don't hire dowsers. To a rational person, that would tell them something rather obvious. But that's your problem. You are not rational.

Then you don’t understand it, every dowser passes the preliminary test it’s the closed test that is the problem.
LOL. You really can't read with comprehension at all, can you? JREF runs the preliminary test. Not you. No dowser has ever passed the preliminary test. Did you look at those videos we linked?

It’s more like a clarification of the rules that’s all.

In other words they can have all the news they want but not the credit from the further knowledge or theory’s.
It is a request to change the rules, not a clarification. But it really doesn't matter. Why is it that you cannot understand (even though you've been told numerous times, even by Randi himself) that they don't want to hear your theories. All they care about is can you dowse successfully. If you succeed, you can clam up about how you did it. Sell them to a mining company if you can.

[Ripley Twenty-Nine]

LOL. You really can't read with comprehension at all, can you? JREF runs the preliminary test. Not you. No dowser has ever passed the preliminary test. Did you look at those videos we linked?

I believe he got the terms 'preliminary test' and 'open test' confused.

He passed the 'open test' because he knew where the gold was; 10/10. Yet strangely enough, when the test was 'closed' and the preliminary test started, he performed no better than chance.

I've been following Edge's threads for a long time, but I dont remember ever seeing a good explanation for that one...

;)

[Tricky]

I believe he got the terms 'preliminary test' and 'open test' confused.

He passed the 'open test' because he knew where the gold was; 10/10. Yet strangely enough, when the test was 'closed' and the preliminary test started, he performed no better than chance.
I believe you are correct.

I've been following Edge's threads for a long time, but I dont remember ever seeing a good explanation for that one...

;)
Actually he did explain it a long time ago. Maybe he hoped we would forget, but some of us have good memories. In discussing the open test later, he said that he knew something was wrong, but that he didn't want to stop the test because he didn't want to abort his chance at the million. He actually admitted that he lied to Randi at the time by telling him that everything was okay after the open test. Of course, he did not mention this to Randi at the time, so one would suspect that this is a post-hoc excuse.

Or perhaps more likely, Edge is so very deluded that he cannot actually remember exactly what he thought after the ten-for-ten open test, and he came up with the excuse only when he realized that he was caught in a logical contradiction. He's not stupid, just deluded.

But the fact remains clear. Either he lied when he told Randi that the conditions were okay after the open test, or he lied when he later said the conditions were not okay. That he cannot recognize this is further evidence of his self-delusion.

[edge]

Edge tell us seriously...

How bad has the testresult be before you admit to yourself that it is only ideomotor effect and nothing paranormal? Are you man enough to change your mind?

How can it be paranormal when it's been explaned in medical terms?

I believe he got the terms 'preliminary test' and 'open test' confused.

So your saying I have to take the test open and closed more than once each?

[steenkh]

So your saying I have to take the test open and closed more than once each?
The combination of an open and closed test is what constitutes the preliminary test. After that you have to go through the same again, but this time you have to do it with greater certainty (not accuracy) than before, which will probably mean that there will be more objects or whatever to dowse for, of which you have to do the same percentage as before. So, if you claim you can do 9 out of 10, and 10 was the number of objects for the preliminary test, for the final test, you might have to do 18 out of 20.

[case sensitive]

Edge tell us seriously...

How bad has the testresult be before you admit to yourself that it is only ideomotor effect and nothing paranormal? Are you man enough to change your mind?

How can it be paranormal when it's been explaned in medical terms?



So you agree that dowsing is a result of the ideomotor effect? Then why are you going to do the challenge?

I repeat and clearify myself in hope of an answer this time.

Edge tell us seriously...

How bad has the testresult be before you admit to yourself that dowsing doesn't work? Are you man enough to change your mind?

[Tricky]

So your saying I have to take the test open and closed more than once each?
Yes, it's clearly stated in the rules. The "open" test is just the first part of both tests which asks you to dowse (or whatever it is you do) while you know the answers. Don't you remember when Randi showed you where the target was and then you (successfully) dowsed for it? That was the "open" part of the preliminary test.

The open test is to prevent the test-taker from making excuses later because the test-taker agreed their power was working fine. As you demonstrated, it does not keep a deluded person from making excuses anyway, but it does remove the credibility of the excuse-maker because either they were lying when they agreed their power was working or they were lying when they made the post-hoc excuses.

[Spektator]

Tricky said,
(snip)

And besides how could they not afford to travel in order to sell their ideas after all they are willing to give a million away you would think to promote themselves they could afford a motel or a camping trip?
(snip)
And you say,
The testers are giving up their time without compensation. Nobody should have to shell out their own money to feed your delusions.

Never know who’s delusional and there you go calling names shame on you!
The testers are on the clock any way and getting out of the office is a good thing.

(snip)
Then you don’t understand it, every dowser passes the preliminary test it’s the closed test that is the problem.

(snip)


1. Edge, the observers who would be testing you in California are not employed by JREF. They are volunteers. They are unpaid volunteers. They have nothing to do with the million dollar prize. The million dollar prize is not the exclusive possession of JREF. JREF could not use the million dollars that is in the bank to buy a yacht for the organization. The money is earmarked. The donor(s) who gave it specified that it could only be used as the award in the event the JREF challenge was ever won. Please be clear on that.

2. The testers are not on the clock, if by that you mean they are earning money from the JREF. They are not employed by the JREF (see number 1 above). They are unpaid volunteers. JREF does not pay them. If you should pass the preliminary test, then JREF employees might administer the final test, but the initial testers do what they do out of the kindness of their hearts, not for a salary. When you took and failed your first preliminary dowsing test, you went to the JREF, so at THAT time you were tested by JREF employees, including the J himself. This time, way out in California, you would be tested by volunteers, not by anyone who works for the JREF. Sorry to beat a dead horse, but you need to understand this, so you can understand that the testers' expenses will not be paid by the JREF.

3. "...every dowser passes the preliminary test it’s the closed test that is the problem." You do not understand the difference between "preliminary test" and "open test." A preliminary test is made up of two stages: first a dry-run open test, to make sure that everything is working as the challenger expects it to, and then the closed test. These two parts, the open and the closed phase, make up the preliminary test. If you should achieve a success rate of ten out of then in this first, preliminary, set of an open and a closed run, THEN you would qualify for the final test, which would be more difficult. The JREF might, for example, ask you to make a run of 100 tests instead of ten tests, just to make sure the initial result was not a fluke.

I hope this helps. Hurry and get your application in.

[gnome]

I half suspect that if anyone were to actually pass the preliminary test, the JREF would be interested enough in the final outcome to facilitate the logistics behind the formal test.

[Spektator]

I half suspect that if anyone were to actually pass the preliminary test, the JREF would be interested enough in the final outcome to facilitate the logistics behind the formal test.
Oh, I'm pretty sure they would, too. The problem is getting through the preliminary test first so this could happen, and no one will ever get through the preliminary test without first sending in a valid application.

[Ririon]

...
That’s exactly right Ririon.
...
:eye-poppi :eek: :jaw-dropp

Well, hard to argue with that... I take that to mean that you agree 100 % with my posts. So you will do another run of blinded self-tests according to our suggestions, and then re-apply if (and only if) those tests are successful.

Good.

I wish you good luck, and look forward to hearing from you in a few days or weeks. Please post even if the tests are negative. They will be unless you cheat, cheat yourself or actually have supernatural powers.

[LordoftheLeftHand]

I believe you are correct.


Actually he did explain it a long time ago. Maybe he hoped we would forget, but some of us have good memories. In discussing the open test later, he said that he knew something was wrong, but that he didn't want to stop the test because he didn't want to abort his chance at the million. He actually admitted that he lied to Randi at the time by telling him that everything was okay after the open test. Of course, he did not mention this to Randi at the time, so one would suspect that this is a post-hoc excuse.

Isn't this the same applicant who claimed the book with the gold colored printing on the cover (which is not made with real gold) interfered with his ability to detect real gold?

LLH

[Spektator]

Right you are.

From 2002, Randi's Commentary about Edge's first dowsing test:

http://www.randi.org/jr/032902.html

[Thing]

To accomplish their expenses with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?

What the Sweet Sanfarian does this mean? Anyone?

[Spektator]

Thing, ask Edge to clarify. He is usually willing to explain.

[Tricky]

Isn't this the same applicant who claimed the book with the gold colored printing on the cover (which is not made with real gold) interfered with his ability to detect real gold?

He also included in his target material, Sacajawea dollar coins, which are gold-colored, but have no gold in them. And quartz crystals. Randi just put the whole load into the target cup just so Edge wouldn't have any excuses. But of course, he did anyway.

[Ririon]

What the Sweet Sanfarian does this mean? Anyone?
"Not J.R.E.F. and if so I’ll need a couple of days into dredging season which starts July 1st. To accomplish their expenses with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?"

I am guessing that he will use his talents to earn the money needed to cover his expenses in "a couple of days". But I must admit that those "collections of words" don't make much sense to me. I refuse to refer to them as "sentences". I do of course admit that English is not my native language, so if anybody can accurately interpret this grammar and word usage completely unknown to me, my apologies will follow shortly.

[Tricky]

"Not J.R.E.F. and if so I’ll need a couple of days into dredging season which starts July 1st. To accomplish their expenses with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?"

I am guessing that he will use his talents to earn the money needed to cover his expenses in "a couple of days". But I must admit that those "collections of words" don't make much sense to me. I refuse to refer to them as "sentences". I do of course admit that English is not my native language, so if anybody can accurately interpret this grammar and word usage completely unknown to me, my apologies will follow shortly.
That's pretty much the way I interpreted it too. Your knowledge of English is far better than Edge's (and many other Americans'). That phrase does set some sort of mark for incomprehensibility though.

However, Edge is, by all appearances, undereducated, so I cut him a little slack. On the plus side, he'll rarely say you've misinterpreted him, possibly because even he isn't sure what he meant.

[edge]

Should have read like this,
Applicant’s expenses,
Not J.R.E.Fs., and if so I’ll need a couple of days into dredging season which starts July 1st. To accomplish their expenses, with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?

This spot that I Talk about might have been posted in the Seeing is believing thread.
I'll post it here.
I'll be back.

[Tricky]

Thing, ask Edge to clarify. He is usually willing to explain.
Yes he is, not that it does any good.
Should have read like this,
Applicant’s expenses,
Not J.R.E.Fs., and if so I’ll need a couple of days into dredging season which starts July 1st. To accomplish their expenses, with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?
That doesn't help much. How do you accomplish expenses? Do you mean discover enough gold to pay for expenses? You really think you can do that in a couple of days when you barely make enough to scrape by on?

And what does "remember pounds" mean? English currency? Pounds of gold? Dog pounds?

And which "reading" are you referring to? A dowsing try? Your books on the subject? Going to a fortune-teller?

Edge, you are an English teacher's nightmare.

[edge]

i said, I should hit the mother load this year as I now have a partner that owns the spot I was turned back from, by an angry individual on the opposite shore.
The ground has been resurveyed and the property lines are known.
Rather than have conflict I backed up and went to the spot with the five-dredge experiment took place described earlier on this thread.

I dowsed the spot last year and have to recheck it, but from the bank of the creek it seems to still be there.
I need to walk over it and see.
The water has to drop a little more, a couple of days or so.
This is the second best property in the area to be on, and I knew were I was going last year till I was stopped from dredging it last season.
So now as I suspect they’re to be certain loads in certain areas. We are talking pounds.
We'll see if I was right about that dowsing session.

I dowsed this area and it's still there and we are going to mine this spot.

[nathan]

I should hit the mother load this year

Mother *LODE*

I do wonder about these mining 'experts' who don't even know how to spell their own 'holy grail'

[Ririon]

...
BTW, if you find pounds of gold, you won't need Randi's million. I expect, though, we will hear another excuse about why you didn't.
He needs to find over 100 pounds to get a million dollars. Getting the JREF million is a lot less hard work IF dowsing works at all. Note the big fat "if".

My suggestion to edge is simple: Get your hands dirty and start finding gold! The gold price is high these days. Finding pounds of gold is much more likely than being able to dowse for anything under controlled circumstances.

[Spektator]

Should have read like this,
Applicant’s expenses,
Not J.R.E.Fs., and if so I’ll need a couple of days into dredging season which starts July 1st. To accomplish their expenses, with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?

Okay, let me take a shot at translating:

"I need to cover the applicant's--my own--expenses, and not the JREF's, so I'll need a couple of days in the dredging season, starting July 1, to find enough gold to do that. I should be able to find more than enough gold to cover all expenses in the area I am going to. Remember my dowsing suggested I would find pounds of gold there?"

Sometimes understanding what someone meant on these boards is almost as hard as understanding Elton John's lyrics.

[Nick Bogaerts]

Mother *LODE*

I do wonder about these mining 'experts' who don't even know how to spell their own 'holy grail'

'Lode' is a spelling variant of 'load', according to the Oxford Concise Etymological Dictionary; it isn't used except in 'mother lode' where both are acceptable.

[Spektator]

Edge wrote:
I’ll need a couple of days into dredging season which starts July 1st. To accomplish their expenses, with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?

The couple of days is up tomorrow, edge. Have you sent in your application?

[Flange Desire]

Edge is in no rush to collect the easy million.
All the usual excuses.

[rjh01]

Edge has given no excuses for failure. He has just run away. We can assume he now knows he has no ability.

[Tricky]

Edge has given no excuses for failure. He has just run away. We can assume he now knows he has no ability.
Sadly, we can't assume that at all. Edge is highly resistant to evidence and logic. He is more likely to have withdrawn into a paranoid-delusional shell, fearing that JREF is trying to steal his invention from him. Yep, he's that crazy.

[Spektator]

At least he had the courage to be tested once, though, unlike thousands of others who have extraordinary claims. Maybe he'll step up to the plate for a second chance. Wonder how many pounds of gold he's retrieved so far? We're days into the dredging season now.

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

Lets hear it for the Edgemeister, I thought he'd vanished while trying to clear his area of the US of false targets so that he could retake the test. I guess he finally cleared his town of all gold, platinum and precious metals, and has clearly given the proceeds to charity since he cant afford the gas or motels.

Edge, if you could detect gold and precious metal with any reliability you'd have no need of the JREF million. Dont give us guff about it sometimes being hard to dig up once you detect it, if you could detect it so well then you'd find enough easy stuff to convince people. You cant claim to detect it, then point to creek beds and say "start panning, it's in there somewhere". We know it is too. Why did you have to make a living by chopping logs when you are so confident of your supernatural gold-sensing stick that you apply for this test?

[BillyJoe]

Kenny Belly,

It doesn't work when you use your god-given gifts for profit.

[Spektator]

Edge, if you're checking in, tell us how you're doing at finding the pounds of gold. We want to know, and I for one promise not to mock or make fun of you, no matter what.

[Spektator]

Should have read like this,
Applicant’s expenses,
Not J.R.E.Fs., and if so I’ll need a couple of days into dredging season which starts July 1st. To accomplish their expenses, with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?

This spot that I Talk about might have been posted in the Seeing is believing thread.
I'll post it here.
I'll be back.
Edge, how are you doing?

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

I'm guessing he's financially strapped and real life is catching up with him in a way that $1,000,000 would help with. Either that or an irate English teacher has hunted him down and beat him to death with his own magic stick.

[BillyJoe]

Either that or he has doused that gold and is lying in the sun on a Greek island.

[Tricky]

Either that or he has doused that gold and is lying in the sun on a Greek island.Not a chance of that. The urge to laugh in our collective faces would be too strong. And I've heard they have the internet in Greece.

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

I fear he will have found another problem, some outside reason for his powers failing him in the build-up to a test, and we'll not see him for a while as he tracks down the interference. Again. It certainly cant be his magic stick not working, that's just silly.

[Spektator]

July has almost passed, so Edge has had more than a couple of days. I'd like to hear from him.

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

We all would, but I fear it will be some time. It's about a year since he last said he'd take the test, as soon as he rid his home state of all interference and adverse metals, gravity anomalies found on NASA satellite passes, mass concentrations, platinum, etc, etc. He claims to use his ability every day to find precious metals, yet is living on the edge of poverty and cant get it to work when anyone actually asks him to show it in action. Sad really.

[Spektator]

Well, darn. Edge is one of a very small pool of people who actually had the nerve to test his abilities. Achau Nguyen, self-described telepath, was another. He took a preliminary test and failed in the summer of 2005. However, on August 1, 2005, Mr. Nguyen did assure us all
I do plan on retaking the test next year. Everything you guys say makes alotta sense, but the reason I really wanna do this is to get people on my side, I'm not tryna ask you to give me money, or pay me for psychic advice or anything, or tryna brain wash you with a bunch of woo-woo, I just want people to be on my side and be like "Hey, even though this guy failed, he does have something there" you knows?

For a short while, Mr. Nguyen proposed doing an informal and non-binding demonstration of his abilities via web cam, but apparently he lost interest in that as well. I did admire his first post after his attempt:

I totally failed. No excuses.

Unfortunately, soon after that he did begin to make excuses, much like Edge after his failed preliminary test (there was a copy machine next door, an encyclopedia on a shelf in the room had metallic ink on the cover, etc.).

[Calcas]

I'm fairly new here but this is certainly an "interesting" thread. And, "Edge" is someone I would no doubt enjoy meeting.

Someone asked earlier if (when) he failed, would he admit it his dowsing abilities were due to the ideomotor effect. I doubt that he is familiar with that concept so I would guess the answer would be NO.

It seems as though (in his mind anyway) he has had some luck determining where to dredge for gold in some of the creeks of NorCal. I too have some experience along these lines.

In the 70's I was stationed at an Air Force Base outside of Sacramento and had a friend who lived in Placerville (Old Hangtown.) We spent many weekends panning and dredging the American River near the Placerville area and were usually able to come away with a few flakes. To my knowledge, no one has ever come away with "pounds" although I don't dispute that it's possible.

Edge may simply have learned a few tidbits about where to look. Where the creek/river bends is always a good start as that's where sentiments would have settled over the years. There are quite a few other "clues" about where gold may be more likely to be found but I won't go that into now.

But, how does "having a hunch" about where to pan/dredge for gold have anything to do with being able to demonstrate dowsing in a controlled environment.

Poor Edge is just another self deluded dowser. But, he sems like a nice guy.:)

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

Calcas, let me bring you up to speed.

if you look back through the Swift archives you should find the details of Edge's original preliminary test, conducted by the Jref staff themselves since he was in the area at the time. About a year ago he showed up with his magic twig and a motley collection of gold coloured trinkets, many of which were anything but gold, and claimed he could dowse successfully for any of them. The Jref lumped them all in one big bundle and hid them randomly under one of 10 mugs in a large hall under double-blind conditions.

As expected when he knew where the stuff was his powers were spot on and operational, but when he was asked to find them on his own he did no better than guesswork. He began back-pedalling and claimed that gold-coloured ink in nearby library books, along with other distractions he never worried about during the initial checkout stage, must have thrown his ability off. Excuses flew thick and fast, and he decided he'd go and practice before taking the test again.

He has spent the past year apparently trying to find gold in his local area along with a number of other panners and miners, and to make ends meet he was having to chop wood and do other odd jobs. His plan was to clear an area of land of all false targets and to then practice his art until ready to take the test. As time went on we asked him how it was going, and he went off about needing permits to do it, needing money (despite constantly claiming success in finding gold) and all sorts of physical interference from gravity distortions, precious metals, bits of rock, etc. In short, he couldn't possibly do it.

Edge believes he can find all sorts of things using a stick simply by placing a piece of the target material on the end of it. He claims to find gold easily, yet is dirt poor and no one will hire him for his ability despite his faith in himself. He makes constant excuses for his failure in dowsing. He writes as if English is a second language, and has claimed that it is once or twice. In short, he is self-deluded, although usually fairly pleasant with it, treating us with the pity we deserve as unbelievers.

[Spektator]

Calcas, let me bring you up to speed.

if you look back through the Swift archives you should find the details of Edge's original preliminary test, conducted by the Jref staff themselves since he was in the area at the time.(snip).

It's right here: http://www.randi.org/jr/032902.html

And it was in the spring of 2002. Edge said that year that he would reapply and win the challenge in the spring of 2003.

So far, though, he has not submitted another application.

[Calcas]

You guys take him too seriously.

I've read through the string and his old stuff as well. It's actually pretty amusing.

He's a harmless, self deluded guy who probably enjoys pulling your strings. Everything that CAN be explained to him already has, in great detail and in evry way imaginable.

Here's to you Edge. You little nut.

[BillyJoe]

Unfortunately, Calcas, he's for real. :(

[rjh01]

I think both posts above are 100% correct.

[Tricky]

You guys take him too seriously.

I've read through the string and his old stuff as well. It's actually pretty amusing.

He's a harmless, self deluded guy who probably enjoys pulling your strings. Everything that CAN be explained to him already has, in great detail and in evry way imaginable.

Here's to you Edge. You little nut.
It might be amusing if he were pulling our string, but he's quite serious. He's even tested for the challenge once. In fact, he got a mention in today's commentary. (http://www.randi.org/jr/2006-08/080406move.html#i6) Hey Edge! You out there? Didn't you send James a change of address form?

[BillyJoe]

I think both posts above are 100% correct.No, I agree with Tricky. He's the real deal.

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

If Edge is, as we deduct from his previous postings, living on the bread-line with his family because he's trying to make a living by dowsing for gold, then his delusion is anything but harmless. His fantasy concerning his powers is harming those around him in a very real sense.

[BillyJoe]

Of course it's possible that he is no good at anything else, in which case this family might still be on the breadline.

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

I'm pretty sure from Edge's previous postings that he has a better half, but not sure about kiddies. If he's able to post in a forum, no matter how bad his spelling and grammar, then he's mentally up to the task of flipping burgers at McDonalds or doing any other job not requiring you to believe in the paranormal.

[Tricky]

I'm pretty sure from Edge's previous postings that he has a better half, but not sure about kiddies.
Yep. Calls her "Green Eyes". No mention of progeny.

If he's able to post in a forum, no matter how bad his spelling and grammar, then he's mentally up to the task of flipping burgers at McDonalds or doing any other job not requiring you to believe in the paranormal.
Not necessarily. There is a good reason why people like Edge are loners. If you start expounding on flying saucers, Jesus and dowsing, you can get fired, even from Micky D's. But Edge is not a young guy. His career prospects probably aren't that great. I think remember him once saying he had a part time job to "tide him over until dowsing season" or whatever. I think he just jobs himself out, although I wouldn't put it in the realm of impossibility that you've seen him at a freeway exit somewhere.

[Spektator]

And, Edge, Randi doesn't believe you'll ever re-apply for the challenge. This is your chance to prove him wrong.

[GzuzKryzt]

Perhaps, again, the E in JREF prevailed. Baby steps.

[edge]

I'm still here and mining with the best 6 inch dredge that i could make. I don't have a lot of time right now ,but I am 9 for ten correct in placement of that dredge in the creek as far as being correct in locating and making a profit.

Move 6 inches over and you'll find nothing.

Right now I'm camping and mining.
All i can tell you is that I'm convinced!
I will never mine with out my wand Ha ha.

I will get back to ya and Tricky your a bigger nut than I.

Oh the geolagy {sp.} i'm seeing.

I will read Randis blurb soon.
I am in town to resupply my self.
Be back soon.

[GzuzKryzt]

Well, the E seems to have e-vaporated. :rolleyes:

Edge, I do not believe your claim "9 for ten" is truthful. No offense.

[rjh01]

The big question is 'Have you made much money?' If what you claim is true make your $millions then apply for the challenge just to show off.

I expect you have found a lot of gold recently? I am puzzled by you not saying how much gold you have found in your last post.

[Tricky]

Well hello Edge. Did you see, you're famous. Randi mentioned you here (http://www.randi.org/jr/2006-08/080406move.html#i6)and again here (http://www.randi.org/jr/2006-08/081106inthemail.html#i7) (including your picture). He wonders, just like we do, why you haven't sent in you new application.

I'm still here and mining with the best 6 inch dredge that i could make. I don't have a lot of time right now ,but I am 9 for ten correct in placement of that dredge in the creek as far as being correct in locating and making a profit.How much profit? Enough to afford to take the challenge again?

Move 6 inches over and you'll find nothing.
Of course, to prove that, you would have to move over 6 inches and show that there was nothing, and you'd have to do this numerous times. Are you doing this?

But putting that aside, Edge, nobody here doubts that you have some skills as a gold finder. That comes with experience. It is your insistance on magic that is the sticking point. You have never been able to show that your magic dowsing rod works even when you know there is significant gold in one of the targets. You really should give yourself more credit for your own ability to evaluate the conditions for finding gold, even though by all accounts, you haven't found enough to escape what appears to be a rather austere lifestyle.

Right now I'm camping and mining.
All i can tell you is that I'm convinced!
LOL. We know you are convinced, Edge. But can you prove your skills to others? That is where you have failed.

I will get back to ya and Tricky your a bigger nut than I. Oh, I couldn't accept such an honor!

Oh the geolagy {sp.} i'm seeing.
It's geology. Yes, that's a very geologically interesting area of the country. Almost all areas with gold deposits are interesting because gold does not simply appear in cooling magmatic rocks. It has to be concentrated by diagenetic (post-depositional) processes that can be quite complex. It can be further concentrated by differential specific gravity in fluvial (stream) processes, which is why you dredge in stream beds or old stream beds. It takes a trained eye to recognize the conditions where this concentration occurs. I'm a soft-rock geologist myself, so I don't claim to know as much as someone like Correa Neto (http://forums.randi.org/member.php?u=1285), who is closely involved with mineral mining.

I will read Randis blurb soon.
I am in town to resupply my self.
Be back soon. I hope you do read it. He thinks you will never apply again. I hope you prove him wrong, but remember the advice you were given earlier. You cannot dictate the rules of the Challenge. Especially remember Rule 6. (http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html)All of the applicant's expenses such as transportation, accommodation, materials, assistants, and/or all other costs for any persons or procedures incurred in pursuit of the reward, are the sole responsibility of the applicant. Neither the JREF nor JR will bear any of the costs.If you expect a JREF representative to come to you, then you will have to pay his or her expenses. That means you had better have everything in place when they arrive so you don't have to pay lodging expenses for very long. Properly designed, it should only take an afternoon. The hard part will be hammering out the protocol with Jeff Wagg.

[GzuzKryzt]

However, edge, should you apply again and have your application accepted, the Forum Regulars will assist you to the best of our abilities in working out an easy-as-can-be protocol.

We're good to go.

[Calcas]

Edge is back...LOL.

Where are you dredging? No, you don't have to tell us "specifically" because you wouldn't want anyone stealing your spot would you? Northern California, right?

I used to dredge the American River and some tributaries not far from Placerville. Lots of gold still up thar in them hills, right?

Come on back into the fold, Edge. As Tricky said, your fans are clamoring for more.

[Spektator]

Edge, please apply again for the challenge, then let us help you work out the protocol.

[GzuzKryzt]

Edge, please apply again for the challenge, then let us help you work out the protocol.

Second.

[Meffy]

I will never mine with out my wand Ha ha.

I'm reminded of a certain cartoon elephant who was certain he could never fly without his magic feather clutched in his trunk. But guess what? *nodnod* Yup.

[edit] And please do apply for the million. That's the mandatory first step. After that a protocol acceptable to both sides can be worked out.

[edge]

Oh I will!

[GzuzKryzt]

Oh I will!

Can you be more specific please, Edge?

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

Oh I will!

C'mon Edge, we've been hearing that for quite some time now. Get the finger out and make a serious application to the JREF and lets have at it. We're all dying to see what happens this time round, we really are. Prove to a skeptical world once and for all that your stick can detect precious metals at a distance.

In all seriousness, the forum regulars are always eager to help people with designing protocols that are both fair and relatively simple, and we will help you in any reasonable way we can to take the test, and maybe you'll win the $1,000,000 prize. It's got to be worth it if you are convinced of your powers.

[edge]

Tricky said,Of course, to prove that, you would have to move over 6 inches and show that there was nothing, and you'd have to do this numerous times. Are you doing this?


I have, 17 spots in a quarter mile section.
I bypassed the lower 7 and went for the first ten that where the better spots and cleaned them out.
Now that that part of the creek is done and I got the gold that was there I went to the 7 spots that had very little and by that I mean less than a quarter of penny weight or a half a penny weight a day.
Anything over a pennyweight a day starts becoming interesting.

My first ten spots produced about a quarter of an once and better per day for at least 40 days, now I have spent about 8 or 9 days checking the lesser spots and have hit about 7 of them.
I was right about them they weren’t worth doing, but they are the only spots left with gold, so I checked them and I was right about passing them up.
I'm on a tail of a bank I will spend 1 more day in this spot just to make sure that there's nothing there, even though the book knowledge says it should be.
I checked it months ago and so far I was right about passing them by.


You guys crack me up! All worried about how rich or poor I am, how smart or what I do for A LIVING.
I told you all a long time ago that I'm in the trades of construction, any of them, this is just the longest vacation I have ever had.
Three years of mining and being in Gods country.


I have a daughter that’s going to school to be a lawyer and yes I love pulling your strings.


I am ten for ten correct with my dredge and 7 out of 7 for locations that have gold in them but not enough to really dredge.

But you can't prove that they are not worth it unless you move the ground and see even though they were a loss to me, I had to know. Only because of you and to know for myself, Am I right or are you right. You see if you are right I might be passing on a good lode.
But lo and behold I was right, the spots I by passed where not worth it, dredging that is.

I'm about to come back to town in a day or two and ether stop dredging and take the challenge or hit the Trinity River and dredge there.



I'm going to print out the application today.

As soon as I can find it!

I have been living where the streets have no name OH Oh, where the streets have no name, my favorites.

Collective soul, “forces from the center of the earth I guess, I can feel it”., another one of my favorites.

[edge]

I have pictures of this expedition and of the surrounding area and the gold but later.

[Psiload]

***snip***
My first ten spots produced about a quarter of an once and better per day for at least 40 days, now I have spent about 8 or 9 days checking the lesser spots and have hit about 7 of them. ***snip***

1/4 of an ounce of gold per day? That's like $150 per day at current gold prices. And that's a good day?

I sure hope you're enjoying your "vacation", because it sounds like you could make more actual money flipping burgers. You wouldn't have to invest in a shovel and a mule, and It'd probably be a lot easier on your back to boot.

Thanks to the HBO series Deadwood (I love that show), I now know how to properly classify edge.

You, sir, are a hooplehead.

Edited to add...

Holey moley! edge considers anything over a pennyweight per day to be "interesting". A pennyweight is about 1.5 grams. Being generous with the conversions... we're talking like $20/day worth of gold. Twenty bucks for a day of backbreaking labor is "interesting"?

[GzuzKryzt]

...
I am ten for ten correct with my dredge and 7 out of 7 for locations that have gold in them but not enough to really dredge.

But you can't prove that they are not worth it unless you move the ground and see even though they were a loss to me, I had to know. Only because of you and to know for myself, Am I right or are you right. You see if you are right I might be passing on a good lode.
But lo and behold I was right, the spots I by passed where not worth it, dredging that is.

I'm about to come back to town in a day or two and ether stop dredging and take the challenge or hit the Trinity River and dredge there.



I'm going to print out the application today.

As soon as I can find it!

I have been living where the streets have no name OH Oh, where the streets have no name, my favorites.

Collective soul, “forces from the center of the earth I guess, I can feel it”., another one of my favorites.

I consider your "ten for ten correct" and "seven for seven" very unlikely. It smells of cooking books. Again, no offense.

However, I would gladly be proven wrong in an actual controlled test. If you have trouble finding your application, edge, here's a helpful link: http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html

Should you apply properly - that means including a reasonable basic protocol to your claim letter - we the Forum Members will help you to the best of our abilities. I very much doubt that anyone in their right mind would want you to fail.



Edge, I hope you're not running to stand still.

[Plasmadog]

I consider your "ten for ten correct" and "seven for seven" very unlikely. It smells of cooking books. Again, no offense.

But then of course, even if it's true, it only demonstrates that Edge knows where to find small amounts of gold in a stream bed. That can be done quite easily without the aid of a magic stick.

[BillyJoe]

It always astounds me where these ideas come from.
Who got it into their head that a piece of stick held a certain way could help you find gold?
Where did the idea of doing this come from?

[GzuzKryzt]

...
Where did the idea of doing this come from?

Interesting question, a little hard to answer satisfactory. Ask this in the "General Skepticism" forum and the thread will bulge with speculations and other yada³.

The important question seems: How do we efficiently present dowsing results achieved in a controlled setting to the public?

Perhaps this myth needs to get busted on a regular basis. Busted! And again. Busted! And again.

[Tricky]

Tricky said,

I have, 17 spots in a quarter mile section.
I bypassed the lower 7 and went for the first ten that where the better spots and cleaned them out.
Now that that part of the creek is done and I got the gold that was there I went to the 7 spots that had very little and by that I mean less than a quarter of penny weight or a half a penny weight a day.
Anything over a pennyweight a day starts becoming interesting.
You still haven't told us how you do this. Do you spend the same amount of time on the places with poor dowsing responses as you do on the ones with good responses? Though it might seem a waste of time to you, it is the only way to evaluate them fairly.


My first ten spots produced about a quarter of an once and better per day for at least 40 days, now I have spent about 8 or 9 days checking the lesser spots and have hit about 7 of them.
I was right about them they weren’t worth doing, but they are the only spots left with gold, so I checked them and I was right about passing them up.
I'm on a tail of a bank I will spend 1 more day in this spot just to make sure that there's nothing there, even though the book knowledge says it should be.
I checked it months ago and so far I was right about passing them by.
And you are now quite wealthy, right?

You guys crack me up! All worried about how rich or poor I am, how smart or what I do for A LIVING.
I told you all a long time ago that I'm in the trades of construction, any of them, this is just the longest vacation I have ever had.
Three years of mining and being in Gods country. Yeah, it's a great life. Live out of a tent. Work your butt off all day. You make it sound so wonderful. But if you really could dowse for gold, you could still enjoy your bucolic pleasures but have a little spare money for those times when you want to sleep in a real bed.


I have a daughter that’s going to school to be a lawyer...
Are you helping pay for your daughter's education?
...and yes I love pulling your strings.
Pulling our strings, are you? Well, the best way to do that would be to win the Randi Challenge. That would pull them good.

I am ten for ten correct with my dredge and 7 out of 7 for locations that have gold in them but not enough to really dredge.

But you can't prove that they are not worth it unless you move the ground and see even though they were a loss to me, I had to know. Only because of you and to know for myself, Am I right or are you right. You see if you are right I might be passing on a good lode.
But lo and behold I was right, the spots I by passed where not worth it, dredging that is.

I'm about to come back to town in a day or two and ether stop dredging and take the challenge or hit the Trinity River and dredge there.
If you are right, then you can prove it. Your diary, interesting though it is, is not particularly convincing. You were a total washout the first time you tried to convince us. You haven't even tried the test again, though you've had plenty of time to prepare. October is coming and that means excuse time. Are you going to chicken out again?



I'm going to print out the application today.

As soon as I can find it!I'll believe it when I see it. You've already had it pointed out to you (again and again and again.) But printing it out is not useful unless you FILL it out and send it in. Many here have offered to help you with the difficult parts. Since you were willing to lie in order to get a chance to try for the million the first time, I can't guess what is holding you up when you are so sure of success this time.

Or are you not that sure? I know you will never admit it, but I suspect that deep down inside, you know you are a charlatan and you don't want that exposed to the world... again.

[GzuzKryzt]

...
The important question seems: How do we efficiently present dowsing results achieved in a controlled setting to the public?

Perhaps this myth needs to get busted on a regular basis. Busted! And again. Busted! And again.

Like this: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7461912885649996034

[nathan]

It always astounds me where these ideas come from.
Who got it into their head that a piece of stick held a certain way could help you find gold?
Where did the idea of doing this come from?

An old man is walking with a younger man. The old man has a walking stick. At some point he uses said stick to point and says 'there's gold in them thar hills'. Young man thinks 'hey, I wish I had such a pointing stick' :)

[BillyJoe]

Good one :D

What about a pronged stick held with both hands?

http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:IMSWM9tWVwM5oM:http://www.thunting.com

Actually, what sort of stick does Dr Edge use?

[Tricky]

Good one :D

What about a pronged stick held with both hands?

http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:IMSWM9tWVwM5oM:http://www.thunting.com

Actually, what sort of stick does Dr Edge use?
Similar to what you pictured. Here is where he took the challenge a couple of years ago. (http://www.randi.org/jr/032902.html)

http://www.randi.org/images/032902-G1.jpg

[sillyhead]

Wonder where he is. I'm enjoying the interaction.

[BillyJoe]

...you mean the lack of ;)

[sillyhead]

Well, I WAS enjoying the interaction, when it was happening. Now I'm not enjoying the lack of it. (:

[rjh01]

Edge has a different reality to the rest of us. It is interesting what he has to say. When he says it.

Hope he gets enough gold to keep him going.

[BillyJoe]

Well, I WAS enjoying the interaction, when it was happening. Now I'm not enjoying the lack of it. (:No, I mean enjoying the lack of interaction - between edge's stick and the gold! :D

[Spektator]

Edge promised us he would reapply after a couple of days of gold-mining in July:

....I’ll need a couple of days into dredging season which starts July 1st. To accomplish their expenses with the ground that I’m going to, remember pounds, is my reading?

Have you sent in the application, Edge? We're nearly halfway through September.

[wert]

Edge has successfully applied for testing before, so he should have no problems with doing so again.

But then again, Edge has never been terribly honest in regards to his first test, finding all kinds of dumb excuses to try to explain away his abject failure.

[edge]

Here's what I know.
It can be proven with a dredge and a lot of time.
It would take at least 70 days to do so. That’s the time it took me to try 11 good spots and eight places where there was a loss of profits.
I went to the park , the most neutral place I could find , I checked it with a metal detector and It verified that there was nothing near the surface.
I ran the test for about ten minutes and it can't be done that away either.

As I dowsed there was no reaction to the target or any of the containers, so I tried harder and then there was a reaction to the containers that had no target material in them as well as the one with the target.

I don't think that any one will want to prove it with a dredge; I couldn't afford to supply three people although it would be interesting to do so.

There is one other way but I will have to run several tests to make sure that it can be done and at which point I would file with J.R.E.F....and i could go to them to be tested.


The only thing is to dowse for magnetic fields and that’s where the ballast test would come to play.

Ten ballasts or transformers whichever is the strongest, it is a target that can over ride anything that’s under it, in the earth.

If it can’t be done that way,
it has to be tested in the field, with a dredge that would take outside backers.

[edge]

70 days camping has put me at my prime weight; I lost 34 lbs., and had to put 10 back on.
You want to get in shape go mining

[timokay]

Here's what I know.
It can be proven with a dredge and a lot of time.
It would take at least 70 days to do so. That’s the time it took me to try 11 good spots and eight places where there was a loss of profits.
I went to the park , the most neutral place I could find , I checked it with a metal detector and It verified that there was nothing near the surface.
I ran the test for about ten minutes and it can't be done that away either.

As I dowsed there was no reaction to the target or any of the containers, so I tried harder and then there was a reaction to the containers that had no target material in them as well as the one with the target.

I don't think that any one will want to prove it with a dredge; I couldn't afford to supply three people although it would be interesting to do so.

There is one other way but I will have to run several tests to make sure that it can be done and at which point I would file with J.R.E.F....and i could go to them to be tested.


The only thing is to dowse for magnetic fields and that’s where the ballast test would come to play.

Ten ballasts or transformers whichever is the strongest, it is a target that can over ride anything that’s under it, in the earth.

If it can’t be done that way,
it has to be tested in the field, with a dredge that would take outside backers.



Can you dowse in a controlled environment anywhere to demonstrate that dowsing works? Or do you require dredging and mining equipment for every demostration?

[Psiload]

70 days camping has put me at my prime weight; I lost 34 lbs., and had to put 10 back on.
You want to get in shape go mining So...

you've lost a helluva lot more weight than you've found, huh?

[GzuzKryzt]

Here's what I know.
It can be proven with a dredge and a lot of time.
It would take at least 70 days to do so. That’s the time it took me to try 11 good spots and eight places where there was a loss of profits.
I went to the park , the most neutral place I could find , I checked it with a metal detector and It verified that there was nothing near the surface.
I ran the test for about ten minutes and it can't be done that away either.

As I dowsed there was no reaction to the target or any of the containers, so I tried harder and then there was a reaction to the containers that had no target material in them as well as the one with the target.

I don't think that any one will want to prove it with a dredge; I couldn't afford to supply three people although it would be interesting to do so.

There is one other way but I will have to run several tests to make sure that it can be done and at which point I would file with J.R.E.F....and i could go to them to be tested.


The only thing is to dowse for magnetic fields and that’s where the ballast test would come to play.

Ten ballasts or transformers whichever is the strongest, it is a target that can over ride anything that’s under it, in the earth.

If it can’t be done that way,
it has to be tested in the field, with a dredge that would take outside backers.

Along the lines of what timokay already asked, edge: How does this post affect your forthcoming JREF Challenge Application?

I'm glad you're alright.

[BillyJoe]

I went to the park , the most neutral place I could find, I checked it with a metal detector and It verified that there was nothing near the surface.Do you mean that you determined the most neutral place by checking it with a metal detector and verifying that there was nothing near the surface?
It?

As I dowsed there was no reaction to the target or any of the containers, so I tried harder and then there was a reaction to the containers that had no target material in them as well as the one with the target.How do you "try harder"?
Doesn't the dowsing rod do all the work?
Anyway it seems you (or the rod) failed.

I don't think that any one will want to prove it with a dredge; I couldn't afford to supply three people although it would be interesting to do so.I still think it's funny - dredge (Dr. Edge)

The only thing is to dowse for magnetic fields and that’s where the ballast test would come to play.....Ten ballasts or transformers whichever is the strongest, it is a target that can over ride anything that’s under it, in the earth.How come in the field you can pick up all sorts of stuff with total disregard to what else is about?

[FFed]

Enough is enough. Either do the test again or admit what you already know, that you can't dowse for jack. Your continued evasion of being tested again shows that you realize you can't dowse, and the only reason you delay is because you want your delusion to continue. Get some professional help.

:Banane14:

[Ladewig]

Here's what I know.
It can be proven with a dredge and a lot of time.
It would take at least 70 days to do so. That’s the time it took me to try 11 good spots and eight places where there was a loss of profits.
I went to the park , the most neutral place I could find , I checked it with a metal detector and It verified that there was nothing near the surface.
I ran the test for about ten minutes and it can't be done that away either.

As I dowsed there was no reaction to the target or any of the containers, so I tried harder and then there was a reaction to the containers that had no target material in them as well as the one with the target.

I don't think that any one will want to prove it with a dredge; I couldn't afford to supply three people although it would be interesting to do so.

There is one other way but I will have to run several tests to make sure that it can be done and at which point I would file with J.R.E.F....and i could go to them to be tested.


The only thing is to dowse for magnetic fields and that’s where the ballast test would come to play.

Ten ballasts or transformers whichever is the strongest, it is a target that can over ride anything that’s under it, in the earth.

If it can’t be done that way,
it has to be tested in the field, with a dredge that would take outside backers.

I'm a little confused, so let me ask a question.

In searching for a place to do your open test (an open test being one where you know where the target is), you used a metal detector to scan a place that was not near any buildings. The open test did not produce the outcome you expected. You concluded that there was some material buried too deep to detect with a metal detector but not too deep for you to detect with your dowsing equipment. Is that a summary of your position?


ETA: if your dowsing technique is so much better than a metal detector, why didn't you use the dowsing equipment to scan the area before you started the test.

[Tricky]

Here's what I know.
It can be proven with a dredge and a lot of time.
It would take at least 70 days to do so. That’s the time it took me to try 11 good spots and eight places where there was a loss of profits.
I went to the park , the most neutral place I could find , I checked it with a metal detector and It verified that there was nothing near the surface.
I ran the test for about ten minutes and it can't be done that away either.

As I dowsed there was no reaction to the target or any of the containers, so I tried harder and then there was a reaction to the containers that had no target material in them as well as the one with the target.

I don't think that any one will want to prove it with a dredge; I couldn't afford to supply three people although it would be interesting to do so.

There is one other way but I will have to run several tests to make sure that it can be done and at which point I would file with J.R.E.F....and i could go to them to be tested.


The only thing is to dowse for magnetic fields and that’s where the ballast test would come to play.

Ten ballasts or transformers whichever is the strongest, it is a target that can over ride anything that’s under it, in the earth.

If it can’t be done that way,
it has to be tested in the field, with a dredge that would take outside backers.
Funny, this is not what you were saying earlier when you were going to identify "black sands" in suspended targets or something like that. I will say that it is good that you must at least be doing honest tests on simple targets, since you have obviously failed at them, something that wouldn't happen if you were cheating. What is sad is that you don't accept these failures as evidence that dowsing doesn't work. Nothing you try works, but nothing changes your mind.

So now you come up with a "proof" that you admit cannot be tested without "backers". And of course, you are not likely to get JREF to agree to a test that takes 70 days. You are simply padding your excuses with things that will make it impossible for you to be tested.

Can you possibly explain why you can't find a big lump of gold a few inches away in an area which you have dowsed and found "clean"? No, you cannot. You will make up some story about "natural conditions" to cover for your inability to find gold under the most simple and direct situations. Remember when we suggested that you hang a pendulum of gold and try to make it swing by pointing your dowsing rod at it? That failed too, and you made up some wild tale about forces that only act in one direction.

I won't say you're a fraud, because I think you really do believe that dowsing works. But you are obviously delusional, because no evidence will convince you that you are wrong. And that's too bad, because you seem to be a nice guy. It is a shame to see you wasting your time on this irrational and unproven belief.

By the way, did you find that mother lode that you were certain was just around the bend?

And I wouldn't be to gleeful about losing all that weight either. I remember that picture of you when you dowsed (unsuccessfully) for Randi, and you appeard to be rather slim already. Losing weight is not always a good thing. When is the last time you went to see a doctor?

[edge]

So...

you've lost a helluva lot more weight than you've found, huh?

I wasn't mining for fat. I was mining to lose the fat.

I'm fine Tricky, if you think I was slim in that photo tell me something how tall are you and what's your weight?

Your always in here, on the forum, you must sit a lot?
I found that the doctors are right about height and weight factors.

I'll try to get some pictures on here as soon as I can figure out how to put them on here. They use to have a button on here for that? Don’t know where it went.

laywig asked,I'm a little confused, so let me ask a question.

In searching for a place to do your open test (an open test being one where you know where the target is), you used a metal detector to scan a place that was not near any buildings. The open test did not produce the outcome you expected. You concluded that there was some material buried too deep to detect with a metal detector but not too deep for you to detect with your dowsing equipment. Is that a summary of your position?


ETA: if your dowsing technique is so much better than a metal detector, why didn't you use the dowsing equipment to scan the area before you started the test.
It was for both open and closed.
I did, there was a good chance that I wouldn't detect the deeper stuff as it was very light and in small amounts, there is, what I conclude now is there is no possibility of neutral ground.
After all it is a metal-based planet.
The only possibility is targets that can over ride the metals in the ground.
And yes if I dowse I pick it all up deep and the shallow metals.
The metal detector was correct, but placement of the target and picking up the reaction told me more than I needed or wanted.
The only thing that can over ride that reaction from what I have seen are ballast ether on the ground or a table or overhead possibly transformers.
I got the idea for this when I took the test at the jref, office.
As I passed under them the stick went for them instead of the target. At that point it was defeating gravity you could say, and the metal detecting. The gold in the stick is non magnetic.
James witnessed that.

I don’t plan on failing again if I take the test again.
If this is to be proved what I need is something that is stronger than all E.M.Is.
Ballasts are the only thing that makes the dowsing stick point up and away from the targets, after all it's for a million dollars or ridicule, so I’m making sure. Read what I stated earlier. Eleven good hits and eight bad.
There is no doubt in my mind that it works in the field I have proved it to my self, after all my life and health were on the line, can't eat if you can't find the gold for money. It was a good exercise in surviving.
I got to try buffalo meat that was different.


That should answer FFed also.
Patents my friends.
I have to get more than 50% correct or it proves only random chance.

Three miners have had me teach them what I know, they though that I would find nothing where I had placed my dredge, and because of the history of the area.
It’s pretty sparse on free ground, to get pounds you have to go to privet property.

I still think it's funny - dredge (Dr. Edge)
L.M.A.O.
BillyJoe,askes,
How come in the field you can pick up all sorts of stuff with total disregard to what else is about? I still think it's funny - dredge (Dr. Edge)


L.M.A.O. I never seen that!


Because it all goes through the dredge, it collects any thing that’s metal and holds it in the riffles.
The river or creeks do the same thing Iron, Lead, Gold, all collect together in cracks or pockets.
GzuzKryztaskes,
Along the lines of what timokay already asked, edge: How does this post affect your forthcoming JREF Challenge Application?

I'm glad you're alright. [/quote]

Just been experimenting in the field, trying to figure out why it works one way but not the other, it simply amazes me I can find the stuff so easily but when I’m tested or try to test it doesn’t work very well at all.
After 200 years of miners stripping the creek it is very hard to find

I have to find a target that’s stronger than any thing else in the ground we’ll see, I’ll let you know how the ballasts work, after all after a series of tests with those I’ll be out of ideas on how it can be proven.

[Psiload]

I wasn't mining for fat. I was mining to lose the fat.

Really? I was under the impression that you were mining to find gold.

Here's a curious fact... even if you did find more gold than you lost weight, say 35 lbs. of the stuff... at current gold prices, you still would have earned just about one third of what you could earn if you claimed Randi's prize.

Stick that in your sluice and dredge it.

[rjh01]

If I had a technique to earn $300,000 I would take it. Treat it as a warm up for the $1m prize.

On second thoughts I thought gold was worth heaps more.

[NoZed Avenger]

[W]hat I conclude now is there is no possibility of neutral ground.


Does this mean it is simply impossible to test dowsing anywhere, ever?

[GzuzKryzt]

...
Just been experimenting in the field, trying to figure out why it works one way but not the other, it simply amazes me I can find the stuff so easily but when I’m tested or try to test it doesn’t work very well at all.
...


It seemed to work during the Base Line Test during your test with JREF didn't it? http://www.randi.org/jr/032902.html

[Tricky]

It seemed to work during the Base Line Test during your test with JREF didn't it? http://www.randi.org/jr/032902.html
It's a little more complex than that. He later admitted on these boards (or more correctly "claimed") that he was lying when he told Randi the conditions were okay. The reason he gave was something like,"he wasn't going to come all that way and not get a chance to test", so he told Randi it was okay even though it wasn't. Of course he waited several weeks before offering this admission, and the records of his test indicate that he did ask for several "corrections" before agreeing the scenario was okay. So it is hard to tell if he was lying to Randi or lying about lying to Randi.

In any case, his reaction to being nailed on this was as predictable as might be expected: If he was caught in an inescapable lie, he must create a reason why lying was necessary.

[GzuzKryzt]

It's a little more complex than that. He later admitted on these boards (or more correctly "claimed") that he was lying when he told Randi the conditions were okay. The reason he gave was something like,"he wasn't going to come all that way and not get a chance to test", so he told Randi it was okay even though it wasn't. Of course he waited several weeks before offering this admission, and the records of his test indicate that he did ask for several "corrections" before agreeing the scenario was okay. So it is hard to tell if he was lying to Randi or lying about lying to Randi.

In any case, his reaction to being nailed on this was as predictable as might be expected: If he was caught in an inescapable lie, he must create a reason why lying was necessary.

Thanks, Tricky, for clearing that up. I think it's very vital.

[nathan]

And yes if I dowse I pick it all up deep and the shallow metals.
How deep?

[BillyJoe]

I'm fine Tricky, if you think I was slim in that photo tell me something how tall are you and what's your weight?I'm not Tricky, but I have a neat trick with my height weight and phone number. My height is 1.666m, my weight is 66.6kg and my phone number also contains 666. None of this has bought me any bad luck though - not yet at least :D

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

I'm sorry, but about a third of Edge's stuff is almost incomprehensible to me, I cant follow the grammar half the time nor make out what he's on about. Perhaps it comes with being delusional, which he more and more appears to be. "Delusional? How so?", I hear you cry. Well...

Edge has a magic stick which he believes defies all known science and can be used to detect precious metals, water and minute disturbances in electromagnetic fields, amongst other things. He can detect a few grammes of gold buried deep in sediment, or detect the minute magnetic anomaly in the earths magnetic field caused by a small lump of heavy material. Or so he claims.

In reality he cant detect large quantities of gold hidden under a cup, or indeed any metal of any value hidden under anything not transparent. As he admits himself, every test of the abilities of his magic stick have proven that it's not in any way magic, and is in all likelyhood just a stick. He refuses to accept that.

He has spent three years mining for gold using his magic stick as a guide, and in doing so has grown thinner, not richer. Anyone else in the world blessed with a true method of easily finding buried gold would be independantly wealthy in a short time. He refuses to see this, since he finds tiny quantities of gold where his magic stick tells him to dig. Admittedly he's digging in a known gold field, but it's still proof enough for him.

In short, all the evidence points to Edge being a deluded guy being led around to his detriment by his belief in the magic powers of a twig. All the evidence says it's nonsense, Edge believes it's magic. Deluded.

[Josh Redstone]

I'm sorry if this has been said already (I haven't read the whole thread) but you should be able to get it right close to 100% of the time if you are actually able to do it, shouldn't you? For example, if dowsing or ESP is like any one of our other senses, it should be as simple as picking out a red ball from two other differently coloured balls, correct?

[edge]

Got your message rjh01, I have a disk with about ten or so photos they are in another town and it will take a few days to get back there.

[edge]

I got yours too,Darat thanks guys.

[Silly Green Monkey]

What would wearing rubber gloves have to do with minute muscle movements? What do you think the ideomotor reflex is?

[Psiload]

Oh and by the way the Idomotor effect can’t be the right explanation because I can dowse with gloves on, rubber gloves. So explain that to me????

Classic.

[Ladewig]

laywig asked,

Some years ago, I believed that I had seen every possible misspelling of my name. Since then I have learned how foolish of a thought that was.

Hint: the "quote" button at the bottom of every post is an easy way to ensure that you have spelled the poster's name correctly.

It was for both open and closed.
I did, there was a good chance that I wouldn't detect the deeper stuff as it was very light and in small amounts, there is, what I conclude now is there is no possibility of neutral ground.
After all it is a metal-based planet.


I have no idea how you think buried metals and minerals as well as electro-magnetic fields influence your dowsing stick, so I'll just ask this question: If we put you in a small wooden boat in 200 feet of water over a mile from shore, would you be able to detect one-ounce gold coins under paper cups?

[GzuzKryzt]

...
I'm not the only one that thinks dowsing works.


Prove it, edge.


...
Oh and by the way the Idomotor effect can’t be the right explanation because I can dowse with gloves on, rubber gloves. So explain that to me????

Google results on the definition of "Ideomotor Effect", handselected especially for your reading pleasure, edge:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideomotor_effect

http://www.wyrdology.com/mind/ideomotor.html

http://skepdic.com/ideomotor.html

I don't think wearing rubber gloves renders the ideomotor effect invalid. Although none of the linked articles say that specifically, it seems just common sense, edge. Just like wearing a condom prevents your member from cooties, it does not prevent you from cumming.

[NoZed Avenger]

Does this mean it is simply impossible to test dowsing anywhere, ever?

I am not sure I understand the "no neutral ground" thing. Does that actually mean that no place is suitable for testing?

Am I missing something?

[BillyJoe]

The stick has no intelligentsia?Is this a question, or are you saying that the stick DOES do all the work. I think that IS what you are saying. Moreover, you think that the reason for this has not YET been discovered by science. Is that correct?

[Spektator]

Edge is capable of changing his mind. Some years back, somone pointed out that according to Newton's laws of motion, if the dowsing rod is attracted to gold, the gold must be equally attracted to the rod. Therefore, a small piece of gold, suspended on a string, should swing toward the tip of the rod.

Edge agreed that this should happen, and he conducted some experiments. He couldn't make the sample move, and he was honest about that, admitting that he had been mistaken in his assumption that the rod would act like a magnet and attract the sample.

And he predicted earlier that he would find pounds of gold, and if I'm reading him correctly, he now says he was unable to do that. I do admire his honesty.

However, he doesn't seem to be able to take the next step and admit that the dowsing rod doesn't seem to work the way he thinks it does--or at all, for that matter.

[tsig]

70 days camping has put me at my prime weight; I lost 34 lbs., and had to put 10 back on.
You want to get in shape go mining

You want to make money, just open up a weight loss mining camp.

Should make the JREF million look like chump change in a few years.

[edge]

I'm not sure Calcas
but I'm in Weaverville right now and sure why not.

[edge]

Some years ago, I believed that I had seen every possible misspelling of my name. Since then I have learned how foolish of a thought that was.

Hint: the "quote" button at the bottom of every post is an easy way to ensure that you have spelled the poster's name correctly.



I have no idea how you think buried metals and minerals as well as electro-magnetic fields influence your dowsing stick, so I'll just ask this question: If we put you in a small wooden boat in 200 feet of water over a mile from shore, would you be able to detect one-ounce gold coins under paper cups?

It was a typo sorry?

Don't know about the ocean? I went out in Florida and did some experimenting, looking for Salvage. Spanish wrecks.

[edge]

Big baby? Learn American slang?

I never called you names, I said you were delusional, which is a description of your state of mind. If I were calling you names I'd have called you a pillock or a dingbat or a bampot, good solid British names for idiots. Learn British slang! And while you're at it learn some vocabulary as well. 'Intelligentsia' is a name for a class of mentally gifted people working for society, and not the word 'intelligence' which is what I think you meant.

Your stick does not work, fails every test you give it and still you believe it is embued with magical powers beyond anything science or your own fevered brain can explain. I'd say that makes you delusional, in that you have the belief that your stick is some sort of tricorder like sensing device despite the fact that it clearly is just a bit of wood.

Is that a picture of you?
Your avatar?

[edge]

You also miss the fact that it hasn't failed every test from my point of veiw.

[edge]

You want to make money, just open up a weight loss mining camp.

Should make the JREF million look like chump change in a few years.

Not a bad Idea, good thinking.

[Ladewig]

It was a typo sorry?

Don't know about the ocean? I went out in Florida and did some experimenting, looking for Salvage. Spanish wrecks.


O.K. Did you find anything of value in your oceanic dowsing? Did the rod twitch at all? How deep was the water you were in?

[NoZed Avenger]

I am not sure I understand the "no neutral ground" thing. Does that actually mean that no place is suitable for testing?

Am I missing something?

/taps mic


Is thing thing on?

[edge]

/taps mic


Is thing thing on?

No E.M.Is. Or any metals.
So that the target is the only thing there,
as I already stated.

Here where the ground has been striped or worked is the closest place I could find so far, but still not good enough.
So I think I need something that will overwhelm the metals in the ground Ballasts seem to do that and I will find that out today except I need ten of them to try it, in other words ten targets. But I only have two right now.
Even then the ballasts that are turned off may still give a reading.
I'm hoping at that point that the one turned on, out of the ten will be unmistakably noticeable.

Ladewig said, O.K. Did you find anything of value in your oceanic dowsing? Did the rod twitch at all? How deep was the water you were in?

The ocean has a slight steady pull.
The loads how ever where unmistakably noticeable, they are the heaviest pulls I have ever felt.


This will take a while to tell all that I know about this experience.

From the shore to the load is where I had to go, about 11 miles out it was 60 feet deep.
First I had to get a direction to go in, scan the horizon, I did that standing on shore.

Around the Sebastian inlet, [the area nearest to where I lived] are Mel Fishers’ claims, even though he is dead the family still maintains them and you can lease them, or sections of them.

It costs about a thousand dollars a season to work a section of their claims.
It costs about three to five thousand to run a crew for a month and you have to have the ship and equipment for ocean mining to attempt that kind of operation.

But I had to see if I could get over the top of one of the pulls, or readings that I got and I did, as I said it was about 11 miles out and 60 feet deep.
One diver went down and there was a reef that was all that was visible.


A few years earlier I went there {to the inlet} and picked up on four loads, within 2 years time three were recovered.
One was near the inlet it was silver bars and cannons, one was gold coins, they pulled 50 thousand dollars every day for a month and only in about 6 to 8 feet of water about 50 feet from shore, another was a major load straight off the shore of Wabasso Fl. Which is another ten miles south from the Sebastian inlet.

The people that I tried to get to back this kind of expedition where all talk and 8 months later where amazed when they{other people} found the first load, they read about it in the newspapers and even more so as they knew what I had said was there in the first two spots. The second was found about one year later and third load around another few months after that one.
I never told them of the forth.
Instead I went to it my self to see if it was possible to get us over the top of it.
It was about a five hundred yard circle right over a reef.
This was the heaviest thing I have ever felt.
It’s probably still there, as I could not get the backers or the cash for that kind of operation.


It’s easier to buy a dredge and a permit to placer mine here in Ca., to check myself 20 spots, so far so good.
I wont get rich here but it tells me it’s possible. This whole adventure has been fun And I probably have one more shot at this.
If I win the challenge I will be set up to go anywhere and do anything I want

[nathan]

it was about 11 miles out and 60 feet deep.
One diver went down and there was a reef that was all that was visible.
So a miss then? Did that not suggest to you that you may be misguided?

[BillyJoe]

So a miss then? Did that not suggest to you that you may be misguided?It was below the reef but cost of finding out was impossible and you forget about the other three out of four so far that were hits by those other people.

Dr. Edge

[GzuzKryzt]

...
If I win the challenge I will be set up to go anywhere and do anything I want

For that to happen you have to apply first, edge. Allow me again to post the link to the application: http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html

Your stories may or may not be interesting; surely they have nothing to do with the Challenge or developing a test protocol.

What is your current protocol proposal for you next test, edge, and when precisely will you do which self-test you continue to meander about? Pardon my french, but your dodging is getting pretty predictable and boring.

[edge]

url='http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=1793']http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/222845256b9765dc2.jpg[/url]

I already have a copy, and when I have tested some more on my own.

[wert]

So instead of just blathering around Edge, when are you going to actually apply and discuss a prototcol with Randi?

I doubt you'll apply at all.

[Tricky]

So instead of just blathering around Edge, when are you going to actually apply and discuss a prototcol with Randi?

I doubt you'll apply at all.
He's made a couple of rambling posts about what he would like to do, including the first one in this thread. Randi actually replied (http://www.randi.org/jr/2006-08/081106inthemail.html#i7)to some of his "demands" in one of the Swift newsletters, but Edge has not followed through, in spite of numerous offers by people here to help him fill out the application.

I think Randi assessed it correctly. From what I see here, Mr. Guska is plainly telling me that he doesn’t want to be tested again, and ensuring that he won’t. He’d rather enjoy his delusions, and he’s created a situation that he’s quite sure I’m not going to accept.

[GzuzKryzt]

url='http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=1793']http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/222845256b9765dc2.jpg[/url]

I already have a copy, and when I have tested some more on my own.

I do not understand this posting, edge. Could you please clarify what you mean?

When will you apply?

[Spektator]

I was waiting for Edge to clarify, but I guess he's not going to. What was wrong with the hanging-targets test? Edge said he was getting consistently good readings from that, if I remember correctly.

[BillyJoe]

I do not understand this posting, edge. Could you please clarify what you mean?
When will you apply?I cannot expect someone with that disgusting avatar to understand the plane language that I will fill out the application when I can do it.

Dr. Edge

[russingram]

Pagoda? Oh, sorry then, I thought it was something else entirely. Perhaps I'd better get back to the wife soon before I start hallucinating as well.

DrEdge

see how your mind can play tricks on you, and make you see things that aren't really there?

[edge]

first year with a 5 inch.
The area wasn't worth dredging.
The first picture is in a wall, just gold no metals or signs of humans that was worth digging into.

[edge]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/222845256b9767cff.jpg ('http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=1794')

[edge]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/222845256b9769c3e.jpg ('http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=1795')
The dredge.

I did way better in the wall.
Found by dowsing.

[edge]

You should be able to download and expand.
Page 6 has the thumbnail of the wall.

[Ririon]

You should be able to download and expand...

I should be, but I am not.

[rjh01]

Edge, the pictures would be a lot better if the file size were bigger. 20K each would be good. Plus a bit more commentary on what it all means.

[GzuzKryzt]

Edge, how does the content of these pictures affect your future application? Which you will send when, please?

[Spektator]

Edge, you said earlier you were having very good success with the hanging targets. Why don't you design a JREF test using hanging targets?

[edge]

I'll have three years to summarize and two years of pictures to post. I'll post them on a different site because they are larger than normal.
I think most are panoramic.
Some one asked for them if you're wondering.


It all means something. I can't be that lucky.

Edge, you said earlier you were having very good success with the hanging targets. Why don't you design a JREF test using hanging targets?

I might.

[GzuzKryzt]

I'll have three years to summarize and two years of pictures to post. I'll post them on a different site because they are larger than normal.
I think most are panoramic.
Some one asked for them if you're wondering.


It all means something. I can't be that lucky.
...


Edge, how does this affect your JREF Challenge Application?

[Spektator]

Every so often edge emerges and tells us he's going to re-apply real soon now. And then he goes away again.

I don't think he ever will re-apply.

[Tricky]

Every so often edge emerges and tells us he's going to re-apply real soon now. And then he goes away again.

I don't think he ever will re-apply.
You are probably right, or then again, he may apply, but try to set conditions that he knows will be unacceptable to the JREF (and against the rules of the challenge) as he has already written some time back. In any case, it is pretty much certain that he'll never take the test again. He is not so stupid as to fail to learn from his first embarassment that he should never again be without a prepared excuse.

In some ways, I kinda hope he doesn't waste his time applying again. It seems like the poor guy is living hand-to-mouth. The last thing he needs is something to distract him from the business of survival.

[edge]

Right now I'm picking and signing up for the next semester and I still have a paper to write for you.
The paper will summarize the last three years of mining using the dowsing method to locate gold and all other metals.
I have one third of it written and will have the next two thirds in a couple of days.

The link with the pictures I have to do yet also.
It looks like I have a lot of coordinating to do to take the test again.
A couple of volunteers would help.
Three people, which have a couple of weeks in the summer to kill, to take JERF’s side.
The only way to prove this, that “dowsing works”, with the kind of percentage in my favor is to actually mine with this method like this last summer.
To pick ten winning spots and several losing spots.
I have to write all the parameters for such a test and then JREF, would have to accept the proposal.
Can I foot the whole bill? Hell no.
Could you, “the volunteers”, get any compensation? Maybe if you helping the mining operation. A percentage for your labor, it could work.
Right of the bat we would need a professional Geologist to verify oh ya.
Hint hint Tricky.
I would go as far as to take a lie detector test to verify t that planting and salting of the ground didn’t occur.
90% correct is better than 50%.
As far as BILLYJOE, I THINK HE’S RELATED TO CURLY HOWARD.
I think he is from Kansas.
It’s a lot to think about.

[Dumb All Over]

The only way to prove this, that “dowsing works”, with the kind of percentage in my favor is to actually mine with this method like this last summer.


Are you sure? This is the only way to prove that it works? If this is the only way, then, really, it doesn't work.

[GzuzKryzt]

...
The only way to prove this, that “dowsing works”, with the kind of percentage in my favor is to actually mine with this method like this last summer.
To pick ten winning spots and several losing spots.
I have to write all the parameters for such a test and then JREF, would have to accept the proposal.
...

You know the rules, edge.

You know what it takes to describe your ability, and how to prove your described ability.

Your last steps taken in this forum move towards obfuscation, not towards proving your claimed ability.



Edge, no one will blame you if you admit dowsing does not work. People - including me - will applaud your honesty, if they are in their right mind.

[Tricky]

Right now I'm picking and signing up for the next semester and I still have a paper to write for you.
The paper will summarize the last three years of mining using the dowsing method to locate gold and all other metals.
I have one third of it written and will have the next two thirds in a couple of days.

The link with the pictures I have to do yet also.
It looks like I have a lot of coordinating to do to take the test again.
A couple of volunteers would help.
Three people, which have a couple of weeks in the summer to kill, to take JERF’s side.
The only way to prove this, that “dowsing works”, with the kind of percentage in my favor is to actually mine with this method like this last summer.
To pick ten winning spots and several losing spots.
I have to write all the parameters for such a test and then JREF, would have to accept the proposal.
Can I foot the whole bill? Hell no.
Could you, “the volunteers”, get any compensation? Maybe if you helping the mining operation. A percentage for your labor, it could work.
Right of the bat we would need a professional Geologist to verify oh ya.
Hint hint Tricky.
I would go as far as to take a lie detector test to verify t that planting and salting of the ground didn’t occur.
90% correct is better than 50%.
As far as BILLYJOE, I THINK HE’S RELATED TO CURLY HOWARD.
I think he is from Kansas.
It’s a lot to think about.
Go ahead and submit your application, Edge. Once you and the JREF come to agreement on protocol, I'll be happy to serve as a geologist in whatever capacity is required. But until you take the first step, it is a total waste of time to prepare for an event that is not scheduled.

[edge]

Go ahead and submit your application, Edge. Once you and the JREF come to agreement on protocol, I'll be happy to serve as a geologist in whatever capacity is required. But until you take the first step, it is a total waste of time to prepare for an event that is not scheduled.

I know one more thing now so it's not a total waste of time, and that is you will or might help,very good and here are a few things I have to think of.

I have two operations in progress; one is with a backhoe and tromal, which is a larger operation than dredging with a 6 inch dredge.
The other is an operation with a 10 inch dredge.
The one with the tromal might happen this winter and the one with the substantially larger dredge will happen in July of 07.
There are two claims of twenty acres or more and one on privet property which is loaded. For the 10 inch dredge.
The one with the heavy equipment, the backhoe, tromal and dump truck and or cat has about 180 acres.
This one might happen in a few weeks at which point I can make a possible move to apply.
Timing is everything I will submit when I have a new set up or operation going.
The operation itself is time consuming.

You know the rules, edge.

You know what it takes to describe your ability, and how to prove your described ability.

Your last steps taken in this forum move towards obfuscation, not towards proving your claimed ability.



Edge, no one will blame you if you admit dowsing does not work. People - including me - will applaud your honesty, if they are in their right mind.


Will you applaud my honesty if I can prove it in the field?
After all dowsing for gold happens when you are mining in the field.

With some one to verify that the ground wasn't salted it would be easy to accept right?
I already have admitted that dowsing in a controlled test was flawed some how.
You see I'm still not totally convinced that it doesn't work because 3 years of mining with this method has kept me on the best lines that I could find, what was left to find.

I still find it fascinating that it works so well in the field; it saves me tons of time.
I have tried both ways with it and with out dowsing, with out might take days and with dowsing only minutes!
This is the reason that Joe wants me to head up the heavy operation and the fact I was the only one getting any gold, when no one else was.
After 2 months one other dredger got lucky. But two months of not producing till he finally listened and took my advice.
He hit the next day.

[GzuzKryzt]

...
Will you applaud my honesty if I can prove it in the field?
After all dowsing for gold happens when you are mining in the field.

With some one to verify that the ground wasn't salted it would be easy to accept right?
I already have admitted that dowsing in a controlled test was flawed some how.
You see I'm still not totally convinced that it doesn't work because 3 years of mining with this method has kept me on the best lines that I could find, what was left to find.

I still find it fascinating that it works so well in the field; it saves me tons of time.
I have tried both ways with it and with out dowsing, with out might take days and with dowsing only minutes!
This is the reason that Joe wants me to head up the heavy operation and the fact I was the only one getting any gold, when no one else was.
After 2 months one other dredger got lucky. But two months of not producing till he finally listened and took my advice.
He hit the next day.

I will not applaud fish tales.
I mentioned in another thread that an uncle of mine used to dowse for water. According to various sources, successfully. When I confronted those very sources, not one of them could tell me the day or the location when the alleged success(es) happened. I had to endure harsh criticism to even dare to ask for proof.
I will not applaud fish tales.

I will applaud your success in a controlled test, edge.

Or you admitting that dowsing does not work. After you applied. And got tested.

[rjh01]

I know one more thing now so it's not a total waste of time, and that is you will or might help,very good and here are a few things I have to think of.

I have two operations in progress; one is with a backhoe and tromal, which is a larger operation than dredging with a 6 inch dredge.
The other is an operation with a 10 inch dredge.
The one with the tromal might happen this winter and the one with the substantially larger dredge will happen in July of 07.
There are two claims of twenty acres or more and one on privet property which is loaded. For the 10 inch dredge.
The one with the heavy equipment, the backhoe, tromal and dump truck and or cat has about 180 acres.
This one might happen in a few weeks at which point I can make a possible move to apply.
Timing is everything I will submit when I have a new set up or operation going.
The operation itself is time consuming.

Will you applaud my honesty if I can prove it in the field?
After all dowsing for gold happens when you are mining in the field.

With some one to verify that the ground wasn't salted it would be easy to accept right?
I already have admitted that dowsing in a controlled test was flawed some how.
You see I'm still not totally convinced that it doesn't work because 3 years of mining with this method has kept me on the best lines that I could find, what was left to find.

I still find it fascinating that it works so well in the field; it saves me tons of time.
I have tried both ways with it and with out dowsing, with out might take days and with dowsing only minutes!
This is the reason that Joe wants me to head up the heavy operation and the fact I was the only one getting any gold, when no one else was.
After 2 months one other dredger got lucky. But two months of not producing till he finally listened and took my advice.
He hit the next day.

We will all applaud you if you find lots of gold (I am thinking $10m worth) and then donate $1m of it to JREF to make it the $2m prize. This should not be too hard. You have all the heavy equipment. Everything else you need. And no-one standing over your shoulder demanding double-blind testing. Good-luck.

[Spektator]

Edge, four years ago you were writing a book.

Now you're writing a paper.

We never saw the book.

I don't think we'll ever see the paper.

If you are going to test, test. Please stop all the side issues and design a test, then take it.

[Tricky]

(pointless rambling about stuff going on in Edge's life deleted)

This one might happen in a few weeks at which point I can make a possible move to apply.
This is BS and you know it, Edge. You can apply at any time. You don't have to cite a specific location, just outline your proposed protocol. You'll work out the details with JREF after the application has been submitted. As you know, this takes some time so the earlier you get your application in, the more time you have to work out details.

So one can only assume that by delaying your application you are merely trying to create future excuses, just as you did last summer.

If you need help filling out the application, many (including myself) here would be happy to help you. Heck, if you need the money for the registered letter I'll spot you that much.

If you think you can win, you have no excuse for not applying right now. None.

The only reason that you are not applying is because you know you will lose. That is obvious to everyone here.

[edge]

Link to my dredging photos.


http://new.photos.yahoo.com/dowsing4gold/album/576460762365391133

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/dowsing4gold/album/576460762365409859

Click on the pictures to enlarge.
I’m about to send the application with my 2 paragraphs of protocols’ after tomorrow.
Tomorrow I will secure the ground to do the tests on.
Tricky I hope to see you here for two weeks starting July first.
There are still many things to work out.
I need 2 more volunteers and I have a feeling that if they let you, you will be a part of the crew as well as the JERFS judges, these are still things that need to be hammered out, but I’m willing to share some of the gold with those that help, you will read more about it shortly.
Both crews may have to be seperated.
I still may work out something to make it memorable to every one involved.

[GzuzKryzt]

...
I’m about to send the application with my 2 paragraphs of protocols’ after tomorrow.
...


Great. But I still won't believe it until I see it. No offense, edge.

(The cat in the pics from the second link looks cute. Really. However, one would have to suppress a mild chuckle if one realised you'd post cat pics in your own thread, edge.) :D

[Cuddles]

I need 2 more volunteers and I have a feeling that if they let you, you will be a part of the crew as well as the JERFS judges, these are still things that need to be hammered out, but I’m willing to share some of the gold with those that help, you will read more about it shortly.

The thing about impartial observers is that impartiality generally means not taking part in the experiment or accepting money off people who are.

[Tricky]

I’m about to send the application with my 2 paragraphs of protocols’ after tomorrow.
Tomorrow I will secure the ground to do the tests on.
Your cart is so far ahead of your horse it's about to lap the nag.

You have no idea yet if JREF will approve your protocol (and I seriously doubt that they will), so securing the ground is very likely a waste of time (and money?).

Tricky I hope to see you here for two weeks starting July first.
There are still many things to work out.
Many, many things to work out, like if your protocol will be accepted. You'll excuse me if I hold off on making my plane reservations.

I need 2 more volunteers and I have a feeling that if they let you, you will be a part of the crew as well as the JERFS judges, these are still things that need to be hammered out, but I’m willing to share some of the gold with those that help, you will read more about it shortly.
As you know, JREF says that applicant pays all expenses. They volunteer their time. They don't donate their money. I don't want your gold, Edge, but neither do I wish to spend several hundred dollars on a trip which has only a tiny chance of curing you of your misconceptions.

Let me ask you. If you fail a second test, will you agree to admit, with no excuses or rationalizations, that dowsing doesn't work? If not, then why should I bother?

Both crews may have to be seperated.
I still may work out something to make it memorable to every one involved.If you'll show us your protocol here, perhaps we can help you hammer out some of the problems before they become problems. I cannot concieve why your test should take so many volunteers. A double blind test only requires three people, one of which is the testee.

I have no doubt it would be memorable, but I seriously doubt that it would be memorable for the reasons you expect.

[Spektator]

I hope the protocol isn't along the lines of "I'll go out and find some gold." It has to be a controlled, double-blind test, and there's no way that going out in the field would meet that requirement.

[EHocking]

I can assure that no matter how you're tested by JREF, it will always be a controlled test. It will be designed with the tightest controls possible whether it's in the field or in Randi's office.

Edge, dowsing doesn't work.Further evidence that Edge should contemplate conventional metal detecting methods?

http://www.abc.net.au/southwestvic/stories/s1309966.htm

"An interstate prospector named 'Len' has come forth with a 2kg nugget found near Maryborough...
Len's been detecting for over twenty years; he, like many interstate prospectors makes the trip to Central Victoria every year... last Friday he got a signal in the ground and decided not to dig - it was not until Saturday morning that he dug - I'm sure he didn't realise it was such a big nugget," he says."

Slightly more than the daily pennyweights Edge is turning up....

[Spektator]

Better hurry, Edge. The JREF will be getting more stringent about applications in a few days.

[edge]

Cuddles said,The thing about impartial observers is that impartiality generally means not taking part in the experiment or accepting money off people who are.

They expect me to pay for their expenses, I can in gold or cash.
When it's mined at the time.
It looks like no one here has a brave heart, to willingly volunteer, to take a chance.

Nothing but cynical skeptics, to fat sitting here day after day, being cynical.

See here what Tricky says,

As you know, JREF says that applicant pays all expenses. They volunteer their time. They don't donate their money. I don't want your gold, Edge, but neither do I wish to spend several hundred dollars on a trip which has only a tiny chance of curing you of your misconceptions.

Let me ask you. If you fail a second test, will you agree to admit, with no excuses or rationalizations, that dowsing doesn't work? If not, then why should I bother?


Sure I’ll admit it the second time if I have a need to.

I have a hard time believing that you are so hung up on the money thing tricky, especially with all the money you make working for the Oil Company as a geologist. I would think you would be happy just to get where real geology gets interesting? You should be rolling in the dough, and bored with that flat smelly ground of Texas.
I suppose your too tender to camp and I’ll have to put you up in a local motel?

As far as a metal detector goes, again they only tell you what’s at the surface the best might read three feet deep.
Most of them are only good for about a foot.
The length of the coil at the bottom is as far as they go. If it’s 12 inches across that’s as deep as they are capable of sensing in the ground.

As any geologist knows most placer gold is on the bottom unless it just blew in. This is why that guy found that nugget, it had to be a fluk it must have just been deposited and not had time to sink.

Where there’s the kind of gold worth mining is usually under at least four feet or deeper, deeper than most metal detectors can reach, this is the reason for dowsing.

Why should you bother? because what you will make after the expenses are paid for is profit,either during the test or if jref says you can't then if you want to stay longer after the test, you see because if I pay for your trip then you will get a percentage for being here at least after the test.

I don’t intend to waste your time that is why I’m making sure it’s the right ground verified by dowsing, the first time I hit will be a verification that the ground is good enough to pay five people instead of two. You see I already know that with out mining it first.

Your time is valuable and this is not a bribe but honesty for standing in the heat of the day watching us if jref says it’s OK.
But you will, if you volunteer have to live it like me, on the creek for at least 2 weeks, camping, roughing it.
I don’t know if any one here on this forum can handle that.

I’m waiting for permission from a certain land owner and the spot that I chose is to make sure that it will still bring a profit for myself and the whole operation.
You guys after all have to eat while your here, have ice and drinks and if I’m there you will be as comfortable as possible. You may even walk out with a nugget or two for yourselves.
I found that woman are better at this than most men.
Being there every day.
So they are not excluded from this test if it is accepted.

You like my cat rjh01, they never went hungry and I had three cats and a dog on the creek “third year dredging pics”.
My dog even had a girl friend on the creek the white wolf dog in the pics..

So what’s your problem Billyjoe got to go with a small cat. Usually guys that brag about themselves are “in at a cat’. “Joke”


Spektator said,
I hope the protocol isn't along the lines of "I'll go out and find some gold." It has to be a controlled, double-blind test, and there's no way that going out in the field would meet that requirement.

How blind do you need it to be?
If I had x-ray vision there would be no need to dowse would there?
I already told you how I did it last year and what happened.
If I’m turned down that means James isn’t stupid because he will lose it in the field, that’s the only reason he will turn me down because I will win…in the field, this is where dowsing for gold actually works. There’s a difference in winning ground and losing ground and I can prove it both ways as we go along.
A geoligist can verifiy tampering or not when the gold is being uncoverd and dredged up. This means he or she will have to be on the bottom when the hot spot is being uncovered, not a big deal.

GzuzKryzt It was a picture of the camp I had above the wall were I was digging into, the cat just happened to be there.
The line of gold that I followed into the wall had no signs of human activity, just gold, that is very rare.

Even so if you look at what’s in the green pan it’s not much maybe a penny-weight that gives you an idea of what a losing day is like and if you look in the metal pan that gives you a idea of a winning day. The green pan is on the first year pics, the metal pan is on the third year pics.
I intend to show this every day shown by dowsing, pretty easy to tell the difference. J.R.E.F.will be able to tell everyday however many days it takes, by what I say will be or not be there.
According to you all no one can do this right?

In other words as we dredge I’ll have picked out and marked the wining spots, ten of them, in-between them will be gold but a lot less or none, the losing spots, nine of them. A good stringer will be in a line down the creek in that line I will have marked ten winners and ten losers if they require both to happen I can also tell how big each area will be. This is very difficult as I will be giving three-dimensional readings, how’s that for a blind test? Width length and depth is what I’ll have to read in both instances.

This ground will have three stringers at least.

The idea is to by pass the losing ground and make a jump, what I normally would do. But to prove it I’ll not make the jump and run for nothing, basically to prove it both ways at the same time when it’s there and when it’s not.
To be profitable I have to be on very good ground.

However this can also be proved on ground that isn’t very profitable with less gold in the hot spots and less in-between.
Very rich ground is what I’m going for which will prove I knew right off the bat that I was correct in choosing the area in which we will test and mine at the same time.
Until you’re standing on this creek you have no idea how immense the task is, just using book knowledge helps but I know the odds of hitting that way they are 1 in 30 spots will hit.

Not only is this ground rich from what I can tell scanning it from the sides but I won’t be able to see any of the bottom which means virtually no book knowledge is really applicable.
I do know some of the history like no one has dredged it and the Kelly mine is right above it, that’s it.
This means it’s either there or not.
But where exactly is it?

There is a couple of hundred thousand cubic yards of rock to move on this property before I might even get some so I might go broke.
The odds are in jrefs favor so I had better be good at what
I know!

[Tricky]

They expect me to pay for their expenses, I can in gold or cash.
When it's mined at the time.
It looks like no one here has a brave heart, to willingly volunteer, to take a chance.
It's not "taking a chance" Edge. It's "throwing money down a rat hole". Considering that you've been doing this for some years and still no big success, I wouldn't call what you do "brave". There's another word for it.


Nothing but cynical skeptics, to fat sitting here day after day, being cynical. LOL. There's one way to show our cynical fat asses who's right.

I have a hard time believing that you are so hung up on the money thing tricky, especially with all the money you make working for the Oil Company as a geologist. I would think you would be happy just to get where real geology gets interesting? You should be rolling in the dough, and bored with that flat smelly ground of Texas.
I suppose your too tender to camp and I’ll have to put you up in a local motel?
LOL. If you think I'm getting rich, you're wrong. I just have a job. I don't own any oil, and I'm definitely not an executive-type. You have a grave misconception about the real world, Edge. Maybe if you lived there for a while, you'd see that.

And there is little that is interesting about what you do. There is very little science involved. And yes, I expect to stay at a motel, as I'm suspecting all the other "volunteers" do. You seem to keep forgetting that this is not a fun field trip to watch a deluded person using a little stick to guide him to insanity.

As any geologist knows most placer gold is on the bottom unless it just blew in. This is why that guy found that nugget, it had to be a fluk it must have just been deposited and not had time to sink. Could have been luck. Or maybe he just knew more than you.

Why should you bother? because what you will make after the expenses are paid for is profit,either during the test or if jref says you can't then if you want to stay longer after the test, you see because if I pay for your trip then you will get a percentage for being here at least after the test.
I don't want a percentage of your take, Edge. From what I can see, that wouldn't even pay for the trip. Besides, it looks like you need anything you can get. I'm not going to spend time reinforcing your delusions.

I don’t intend to waste your time that is why I’m making sure it’s the right ground verified by dowsing, the first time I hit will be a verification that the ground is good enough to pay five people instead of two. You see I already know that with out mining it first.
You do realize, don't you Edge, that JREF is not going to approve a protocol where the certainty of the existance and location of the target is not known, with 100% accuracy, in advance? This is why you need to submit your application so you can work out the protocol. If you don't, you are simply wasting your time.

Your time is valuable and this is not a bribe but honesty for standing in the heat of the day watching us if jref says it’s OK.
But you will, if you volunteer have to live it like me, on the creek for at least 2 weeks, camping, roughing it.
I don’t know if any one here on this forum can handle that.
If you think JREF (or any volunteers) are going to agree to a two-week test, you are crazy. How about this. Just have a volunteer bury a lump of gold in several of the spots you have already dowsed and determined had no gold. What could be simpler? Give me a reason why your "skill" can't detect this gold?

I’m waiting for permission from a certain land owner and the spot that I chose is to make sure that it will still bring a profit for myself and the whole operation.
This is total BS, Edge. Have you or have you not been dowsing for gold there for two years. Just go to one of the places you've already found gold (but is now depleted). Natural setting, right? Not enough gold there to set off your dowsing rod anymore, right?

You guys after all have to eat while your here, have ice and drinks and if I’m there you will be as comfortable as possible. You may even walk out with a nugget or two for yourselves.
I found that woman are better at this than most men.
Being there every day.
So they are not excluded from this test if it is accepted.
LOL. If you're trying to make this sound like a vacation paradise, it's not working.

What is it about this that you don't understand:

Edge: I can find gold in a natural setting.
JREF: Here is some gold that we are placing into a natural setting. Find it.

So it becomes ever more obvious that you will never be tested again because you are totally unreasonable in your demands. Instead, you will continue to scrabble out an existence, never admitting that dowsing doesn't work, yet never being able to show that it works. Good luck to you, Edge. I wish you well in your fantasy world, but I cannot help but hope you will join us in the real world some day.

[rjh01]

Edge
I would like your opinion on the video that is linked to the first post of this thread.
James Randi In Australia, the full documentary. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=1738560#post1738560)

The subject is dousing.

[Tricky]

I won't do that any longer. Edge is either self-deluded or a con artist.
Having exchanged posts with Edge for quite some time, I have to say that he is definitely not a con artist. At no point has he ever asked for money or promised that he could help them get rich or anything. He is actually a nice, affable guy who is simply and sadly deluded. It is because of his good nature that I continue to exchange posts with him. Yes, it can be frustrating but it is not wasted.

Even though Edge will almost certainly never relinquish his magical beliefs, it is instructive to others who read this thread and see how the mind of such a person works. If one person reads this and says, "wow, I had no idea that dowsing was such crap," then it's worthwhile. I am reasonably certain that nobody will observe our feckless friend and say, "wow, that dowsing stuff really works!"

[SezMe]

Edge, as others have already noted, NO field test will be an accepted protocol. The results have to be known (or knowable) before or as a part of the test. Your diggng for gold out in the field after dowsing does not meet this criterion (as well as many others).

[Cuddles]

They expect me to pay for their expenses, I can in gold or cash.
When it's mined at the time.
It looks like no one here has a brave heart, to willingly volunteer, to take a chance.
[snip]
Why should you bother? because what you will make after the expenses are paid for is profit,either during the test or if jref says you can't then if you want to stay longer after the test, you see because if I pay for your trip then you will get a percentage for being here at least after the test.
[snip]
I don’t intend to waste your time that is why I’m making sure it’s the right ground verified by dowsing, the first time I hit will be a verification that the ground is good enough to pay five people instead of two. You see I already know that with out mining it first.

Which part of the word "test" do you not understand? We want to test you precisely because we don't believe you can find anything, or at least no more than anyone else would by chance. If we accepted this, it would have to be because we believed you would find enough gold to pay us, but if we believed that we would have no reason to test you in the first place. In addition, your stories indicate that you are very poor and can barely find enough gold to support yourself, if that. Why would we believe you can find enough to pay expenses for 5 people for two weeks if you can't find enough just to buy food for one?

[steenkh]

I don’t intend to waste your time that is why I’m making sure it’s the right ground verified by dowsing, the first time I hit will be a verification that the ground is good enough to pay five people instead of two. You see I already know that with out mining it first.

What you are suggesting is not a test of your dowsing abilities but your abilities as a surveyor for gold. If there is actually anything found there, how would we know that it was not the colour of the soil or whatever that tipped you off (subconsciously) rather than the movement of your divining rod?

[Tricky]

What you are suggesting is not a test of your dowsing abilities but your abilities as a surveyor for gold. If there is actually anything found there, how would we know that it was not the colour of the soil or whatever that tipped you off (subconsciously) rather than the movement of your divining rod?

That problem can be circumvented, though it is a bit of work. Simply have Edge dowse an area in his "natural setting" where he had determined that there is no gold (or not enough to affect his dowsing rod) or better still, an area where he found gold before but now has determined it is gone. Use that site for the test. It would be simple to just put the gold target under cups, but since Edge has already declared he must find it in natural settings, you may have to bury the target in order to please him.

Though a little harder, the test could still be done in a day.

So, Edge. What is your excuse for not taking a test like this?

[ObscureReferenceMan]

That problem can be circumvented, though it is a bit of work. Simply have Edge dowse an area in his "natural setting" where he had determined that there is no gold (or not enough to affect his dowsing rod) or better still, an area where he found gold before but now has determined it is gone. Use that site for the test. It would be simple to just put the gold target under cups, but since Edge has already declared he must find it in natural settings, you may have to bury the target in order to please him.

Looks pretty straight-forward, Tricky. Reminds me of the Australian Mitta Water Challenge. I'd add; have edge provide several nuggets that are "detectable". Have him detect them above ground as a "test run". Then bury them. Have him detect again. Check results. Easy!

[Burner]

That problem can be circumvented, though it is a bit of work. Simply have Edge dowse an area in his "natural setting" where he had determined that there is no gold (or not enough to affect his dowsing rod) or better still, an area where he found gold before but now has determined it is gone. Use that site for the test. It would be simple to just put the gold target under cups, but since Edge has already declared he must find it in natural settings, you may have to bury the target in order to please him.


How would you conceal the digging site so he can't recognise it visually?

[Tricky]

How would you conceal the digging site so he can't recognise it visually?
Any number of ways. You can place ten targets, only one of which is gold, or you can dowse the exact same site ten times, nine times with a non-gold target and once with a gold target. They will all look dug-up.

[Tricky]

Looks pretty straight-forward, Tricky. Reminds me of the Australian Mitta Water Challenge.
Yep. That's where I got the idea. I love that video.

I'd add; have edge provide several nuggets that are "detectable". Have him detect them above ground as a "test run". Then bury them. Have him detect again. Check results. Easy!
Oh yes, the "open test" is de rigeur. As on his first failed test, Edge can provide a target that he knows gets a response.

[Paulhoff]

Pick your excuse, the ground is too wet, the ground is to dry, the sky is too cloudy, the sky has no clouds, the gold is too deep, the gold is not deep enough, the gold is not the pure, it is too pure etc etc and I know you will think of more.

Paul

:) :) :)

[ObscureReferenceMan]

Pick your excuse, the ground is too wet, the ground is to dry, the sky is too cloudy, the sky has no clouds, the gold is too deep, the gold is not deep enough, the gold is not the pure, it is too pure etc etc and I know you will think of more.

True. But that is why The Challenge always has words to the effect of:
-Are your powers "on" today?
-Is there anything that would prevent you from performing?
So we hope there would be no weaseling.

But, that won't stop the weaseling. To cite the Mitta Challenge again, one of the excuses there was that the water "sat too long" and got ionized. Or lost its ionization. Or something.

[edge]

rjh01
All I know is that there must be a lot of variables to water dowsing as there are in metal dowsing.
If they did it in piping then every molecule of water would have to be eliminated, if it wasn’t then from what I know there would be also many false readings, let alone what’s under the field that they tested on.
Are these tests they did, water dowsing,?
Because I cannot load the video on this computer.
I spent 7 years figuring out what could make metal dowsing fail, the same must be true for water dowsing except the difference between metal and water.



Skeptator said, You know better than that, or you ought to. The test you did at the JREF was a controlled, double-blind test. Going out into the field and hunting gold is not double-blind. It isn't even a test.

Edge is obviously not serious. I've purposely reserved judgment and have encouraged him.

I won't do that any longer. Edge is either self-deluded or a con artist.

Dowsing does not work.

That ends it for me.

This is a water planet and a heavy metal planet, it’s impossible to get on neutral ground in either case.
The best tools we have on the planet can’t extract all the metals in the ground, there is always going to be some left, agreed?
I don’t know what to say about your accusations except that I have never asked any thing from any other miner for my services as I left it up to them weather or not to share with me for putting them on the right track..

I think Tricky did a good job in my defense.

There is a greater reason to pass the test than the money and Ashless so far is the only one who has a hint at where I’m going with this.

First thing I’m not here to break James or to just take his money,.
I see something greater after proof, if I can show proof, but there are many variables that interfere with dowsing.
I came here to see if I could figure out what they are and I think I have learned much about why it works so well in the field and not under a controlled setting.
In other words I need creditability for manipulation of the gravity field.
I have explained why book knowledge can’t work always and why you need to dowse so I won’t go into that, just read back on this thread
Why this happens are my theories and I have a whole new understanding now that is totally different from what I thought back in 1999 and before.
When I went to James I thought I knew back then but was proved wrong and I never thought that I would be ridiculed for my belief’s, I thought that it would be more like curiosity and a learning situation.
So I came here to see if I could figure out what went wrong, and I have.

There is no such thing as neutral ground as far as I can see unless Tricky can tell me where we can test where the bedrock is just rock.
Lack of metals in bedrock might be hard to find, and might not exist but there might be an area in the world where we can test with neutrality to do the tests the way JREF tests?
I have dredged a spot clean as I can and what I found out is that most of what I felt was gone and close to neutral but there is a pull here and there which will give false readings.
There are layers of false bedrock or bottoms that still contain metals.
As a miner I can afford to by pass them and move on to the next spot to keep mining because it is not feasible to penetrate deeper and is not cost effective for a miner to destroy any more of the bottom to get to what’s there.
We are limited with the tools at hand and with the laws of mining.

Even a drag line bucket can’t do that and it can go through many layers.
It still leaves some behind.

The one thing I know for sure is that it works in the field and that’s where the next set of tests should take place because it won’t work in an office or a setting where targets are placed on the ground.
If JREF is right I won’t win my way either, if they are wrong I will.
At that point they will lose the bet and it won’t matter it will be such big news they will get what they lost back in a short time just because of the hoopla and the fact that this would be publicized.

I have changed my mind about the ten-inch dredge as it is too big and powerful to do the test and it is dangerous.
I think two six inch dredges will be better for two reasons it will allow close observations of the area being mined. The reason is so the spot can be observed to be a real placer deposit verified by a geologist such as Tricky who will have to be on the bottom to do this with a second set of dive gear.

And the fact that I can shorten the test by a week with two machines,
by attacking two spots at once in two different lines of gold and metals.

No one knows where the gold is that’s the premise for dowsing that includes JREF this is the reason for dowsing for gold.

It’s pretty easy to see the difference as I showed in the pictures of the pans with the gold in them, any miner can see the difference so I don’t know why you can’t?
I can still be fooled in the creek such as getting a pull that I think is a load, and claiming it to be a load, then uncovering a penny-weight of gold with 5 ounces of lead in a pocket.
If I say it’s a winner I lose.
If I say it’s a loser than I win, if I describe it as a loser for gold and much lead I win, I have to be explicit about what I describe in a situation such as this because all metals are capable at being detected.
Since I’m in the gold fields then chances are in my favor that it’s a gold pocket but not necessarily.

What I intend to do is prove it both ways at 60% correct or loads and 60% looser spots in each case I have to hit and avoid the gold no matter how tempting or against my nature to do that is.

I have tested myself with a shovel by hand and with dredges when the season starts for dredging.

Cuddles what I have or don’t have is irrelevant.
You don’t have to concern yourself with that, I will always be capable of making a living and possibly paying for this whole ordeal.



I just read pauls lastest .b.s. and curlyjoes and rjho1

If they test me in the way I discribed and I fail I will then say they are right.
no excuses!

[GzuzKryzt]

Edge, can you whittle your test proposal down to the required length, as described under rule #1 of the application form:
"(...) Applicant must state clearly in advance, and applicant and JREF will agree upon, what powers or abilities will be demonstrated, the limits of the proposed demonstration (so far as time, location and other variables are concerned) and what will constitute both a positive and a negative result. (...)"

From what I understand now, the success/failure criteria have too many variables. But I may be wrong, as I have trouble understanding what you're getting at.

Please post the text of your claim in this thread, as you would write it on the application form.

[George152]

[QUOTE=roger;1664274]No, there will be 10 (or however many) coffee cans, 9 of them empty, one with black sands. Edge claims he will find that full coffee can 50% of the time.

A small piece of advice here.
Black sand generally contains iron and a hidden magnet will show which can it is.
That's probably why he wants to use that specific container

[Paulhoff]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_sand

Paul

:) :) :)

[petre]

My appologies if you have already covered this, edge, but it is a very long thread. At the least, I don't recall hearing anything about this...

I wonder, is there any special requirement of a dowsing rod? Are some better than others? I'm just thinking that an easier way to frame a challenge might be to use a detectable difference in the dowsing results to identify some difference between two or more rods that would be undetectable otherwise.

For example, perhaps you could detect a difference between two rods of different material, or with different filled cores, or any other difference you're aware of that you can detect with dowsing but would not be otherwise detectable through the dowsing activity.

E.g. Perhaps you need not be in direct physical contact with a dowsing rod for it to work, and you could dowse with different rods (of similar weight) within the same obscuring case. If a rod made of oak in such a situation behaves differently than one made of plastic, detecting the difference could be good enough for the challenge.

[Tricky]

rjh01
All I know is that there must be a lot of variables to water dowsing as there are in metal dowsing.
If they did it in piping then every molecule of water would have to be eliminated, if it wasn’t then from what I know there would be also many false readings, let alone what’s under the field that they tested on.
Are these tests they did, water dowsing,?
Because I cannot load the video on this computer.
There are indeed a lot of variables, so the purpose of a test is to eliminate or override many of the variables. The way the test does this is to make everything the same except for the target. The target must be identified as easily "dowsable". This it the purpose of the open test. In your case, Edge, you were allowed to dowse when you knew the location of the target. The same was true of the water dowsers. In each case, the target was so large that it should overwhelm any other factors. That is why you were allowed to bring your own target(s) and why the water dowsing was done with large volumes of water compared to the dry surroundings.

False readings (as an excuse) are eliminated by allowing the dowsers to scan the area when they know there is no water in the pipes.

This is a water planet and a heavy metal planet, it’s impossible to get on neutral ground in either case.
The best tools we have on the planet can’t extract all the metals in the ground, there is always going to be some left, agreed?b
Agreed, but the whole principle behind dowsing is that it is a way to tell the difference between high concentrations and low concentrations. If it can't do that, then dowsing doesn't work, wouldn't you say?

So why do you have a problem with a test that asks you to detect a high, but hidden, concentration of gold?

I don’t know what to say about your accusations except that I have never asked any thing from any other miner for my services as I left it up to them weather or not to share with me for putting them on the right track..

I think Tricky did a good job in my defense.
You mean where I said you were not a con man but a nice guy? That was true. I also said you were deluded. That is true too. I honestly wish you weren't. I feel you are wasting a very worthwhile life in pursuit of a chimera.

There is a greater reason to pass the test than the money and Ashless so far is the only one who has a hint at where I’m going with this.

First thing I’m not here to break James or to just take his money,.
I see something greater after proof, if I can show proof, but there are many variables that interfere with dowsing.
It is not James' money. Most of it was provided by philanthropists. It is in a fund that Randi can't touch. Ever.

But if you are serious about identifying variables, then you ought to be testing constantly with known targets. Unfortunately, this won't find you any new gold by doing this. Pure research is not profitable.

I came here to see if I could figure out what they are and I think I have learned much about why it works so well in the field and not under a controlled setting.
If you don't have a controlled setting, then there is no way to determine how well it works. Still, as I point out, do it in the field if you like, but where there is a test where there is one big difference: The absolute knowledge of the location of a target. Everything else can be "field".

In other words I need creditability for manipulation of the gravity field. The Nobel prize is worth much more than the Randi million. If you can show the ability to manipulate a gravity field without the use of large masses, then it's yours. You will be rich as well as famous.

I have explained why book knowledge can’t work always and why you need to dowse so I won’t go into that, just read back on this thread. Yes, and your explanations have been critiqued and found lacking.

Why this happens are my theories and I have a whole new understanding now that is totally different from what I thought back in 1999 and before.
When I went to James I thought I knew back then but was proved wrong and I never thought that I would be ridiculed for my belief’s, I thought that it would be more like curiosity and a learning situation.
So I came here to see if I could figure out what went wrong, and I have.
Your beliefs have been ridiculed. Neither have you given anyone sufficient reason to accept that you have discovered the error in your earlier beliefs.

You want to know what went wrong? I'll tell you. Dowsing doesn't work. You have merely tweaked your beliefs to avoid this obvious conclusion. They are still not base on any kind of science.

There is no such thing as neutral ground as far as I can see unless Tricky can tell me where we can test where the bedrock is just rock.
There are many such places. a sheer rock outcrop on a mountain is one. There is no regolith, so you are right on top of the bedrock. Conversely, you could do it on top of a place where the regolith was thick and uniform. like on top of a sand dune.

But all of this is moot. You should be able to tell the difference between a place with a small concentration of gold versus a place with a large concentration of gold. If you can't then dowsing doesn't work, because that is exactly what gold dowsing is supposed to do. If not, please tell us what gold dowsing is supposed to do?

Lack of metals in bedrock might be hard to find, and might not exist but there might be an area in the world where we can test with neutrality to do the tests the way JREF tests?
I have dredged a spot clean as I can and what I found out is that most of what I felt was gone and close to neutral but there is a pull here and there which will give false readings.
Actually, you have chosen a place which is the worst possible place to test dowsing. It is a place where false readings would be abundant because of the proximity of natural gold in various locations. What you want is a place where there is very little gold, so that when you place your target, then the target is the only thing your dowsing rod will find.

You have never explained why undiscovered gold gives a better signal than discovered gold.

There are layers of false bedrock or bottoms that still contain metals. Are you now telling us that your dowsing rod cannot distinguish between gold and other metals? Why then is it better than a metal detector? Those actually work, and we know why.

As a miner I can afford to by pass them and move on to the next spot to keep mining because it is not feasible to penetrate deeper and is not cost effective for a miner to destroy any more of the bottom to get to what’s there.
We are limited with the tools at hand and with the laws of mining.

Even a drag line bucket can’t do that and it can go through many layers.
It still leaves some behind.
Of course. That is why it is better to do the test in a place where there is little if any native gold. Sure, you're not going to find any "new" gold this way, but it only takes a day and you could be a million dollars richer.


The one thing I know for sure is that it works in the field and that’s where the next set of tests should take place because it won’t work in an office or a setting where targets are placed on the ground.
If JREF is right I won’t win my way either, if they are wrong I will.
You don't know for sure that it works in the field. You believe it religiously but you don't know it because you can't test it. As I say, bury the targets in the sediment of your "field" location if you must, but you cannot have a test where the presence of a target is not known. Surely you understand why.

At that point they will lose the bet and it won’t matter it will be such big news they will get what they lost back in a short time just because of the hoopla and the fact that this would be publicized.
LOL. Publicized? Have you ever heard publicity about the other failed dowsing tests? Have you ever seen them on the news? Hell, you couldn't even pull them up when we gave you a link.

No, Edge, there is no money or glory in debunking. It is done for one reason and one reason only. Truth.

I have changed my mind about the ten-inch dredge as it is too big and powerful to do the test and it is dangerous.
I think two six inch dredges will be better for two reasons it will allow close observations of the area being mined. The reason is so the spot can be observed to be a real placer deposit verified by a geologist such as Tricky who will have to be on the bottom to do this with a second set of dive gear.
Let's see your application, Edge, then we can discuss how to do the details. As James has already commented, the proposals you made several months ago are badly flawed. They will not be accepted. I've made several suggestions, like burying the target in sediments that you have dowsed as "gold-poor". You have not ever said whether or not that is acceptable or why. You seem to be ignoring my suggestions.

You will have to explain your reasoning, Edge. "Because I say so," will not cut it.

And the fact that I can shorten the test by a week with two machines,
by attacking two spots at once in two different lines of gold and metals.
A perfectly good test can be done in one day.

No one knows where the gold is that’s the premise for dowsing that includes JREF this is the reason for dowsing for gold.
No, that is totally incorrect. The premise for dowsing is that it can detect gold. Knowledge of the location of the gold is totally irrelevant. As long as YOU don't know where the gold is, then YOU should be able to dowse for it, right? It doesn't matter if SOMEONE knows where it is. Unless you are claiming that knowledge of the location gold actually changes its properties. Is that what you are claiming?

You know, of course, that the purpose of the double-blind test is to assure that nobody present at the actual testing knows the location of the gold.

What I intend to do is prove it both ways at 60% correct or loads and 60% looser spots in each case I have to hit and avoid the gold no matter how tempting or against my nature to do that is.

I have tested myself with a shovel by hand and with dredges when the season starts for dredging.
You cannot test yourself. If you know, the answers, then you can't pretend not to. If you don't know the answers, then you don't know if you are correct.

Instead of all this rambling about what you would do if you could do it your way (which you can't) why don't you explain what is wrong with a protocol that places a known target in a natural setting? Why are you avoiding this obvious solution? Is it because you know, deep in your heart, that dowsing doesn't work?

If you don't respond to this direct (bolded) question, then I must assume that you are afraid of the consequences of answering the question.

Cuddles what I have or don’t have is irrelevant.
You don’t have to concern yourself with that, I will always be capable of making a living and possibly paying for this whole ordeal.
I doubt you can pay for a weeklong test, but as I have described, an easy test could be done in a day. Tell me what is wrong with my suggestion.

[Dumb All Over]

Edge, after April 1st you will no longer be eligible to apply for the prize. Randi has announced the changes to the challenge. You do not have a "media profile" and will be unable to produce "academic endorsement". But the old challenge rules will remain in effect until April 1st. Given this new information, do you plan to submit an application before April? Again, Edge, after March you are no longer eligible.

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

Under the new Challenge rules we can dismiss Edge from being eligible and trying to thrash out a protocol with a guy who's head appears to be full of wasps. Sing Hosannahs!

[Tricky]

Under the new Challenge rules we can dismiss Edge from being eligible and trying to thrash out a protocol with a guy who's head appears to be full of wasps. Sing Hosannahs!
Actually, Edge and Randi were mentioned in Newsweek (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=488800#post488800)a couple of years ago. I don't know if that counts.

Having an academic vouch for him may be a bit more difficult.

Ah good. The Newsweek link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4331962/)is still active.
Mike Guska, who failed to prove he could find gold, agrees. He says taking the "Challenge" in an office threw off his channeling ability. Guska wants to retake it: "They're going to have to come to me."

[rjh01]

One option is JREF can tell Edge when your income from finding gold is large we will take you seriously.

I am thinking he should be able to find $3,000 worth gold per week with no mine.

[Paulhoff]

I was talking to Randi at one of the monthly meetings and he said that Edge said the test was setup OK before the test and of course the excuses as always started after the test.

Paul

:) :) :)

[edge]

why don't you explain what is wrong with a protocol that places a known target in a natural setting?


It might take one try or it might take a hundred but eventually I will find it and the validation for more than one try is that here in Trinity Co. I will pull up all other metals till I find it, which is what will happen. A process of elimination with proof of other hits being in the field. Something I couldn’t do in the office.

It has to be a natural setting that is void of metals so that I can get it the first time according to their test concept.

After carefully thinking of that problem I have figured that a lime stone quarry would be a perfect place possibly.

The only place that I can figure would do is in Lansing Illinois quite a distance from here.

I’ll have to do some research to see if there is a similar one near here.



Are you now telling us that your dowsing rod cannot distinguish between gold and other metals? Why then is it better than a metal detector? Those actually work, and we know why.



We went over this but let me classify it.
Placer gold in the creek is found with other metals.


Something I was told by my teacher was wrong.
That is that dowsing for gold will only pick up the gold, my knowledge pre 1999.
What I have learned now is it picks up all metals and magnetic fields.


I have also figured out is it will pick up just the gold as the picture shows myself drift mining into the wall, this is what I learned in that location.
Post 1999.

Why it’s better than a metal detector is the detector is limited in depth again refer to the picture with the wheelbarrow next to me.

Look at the height of the hill,
It won’t give a reading there. It might were I was standing, but highly unlikely.
To be sure I asked a friend who sells them and I am absolutely right.

If it’s a 12-inch coil it will only penetrate the ground 12 inches.
It’s a toy.
They do work. Think for a minute, a coil of copper can tell you that metal is there and what it is, why not use a coil of gold?

It would be probably be a hundred times better but who could afford it?



You have never explained why undiscovered gold gives a better signal than discovered gold.



They are one and the same if they are the same grade and size.
You want theory?



But all of this is moot. You should be able to tell the difference between a place with a small concentration of gold versus a place with a large concentration of gold. If you can't then dowsing doesn't work, because that is exactly what gold dowsing is supposed to do. If not, please tell us what gold dowsing is supposed to do?



This is exactly what I told you I did and can do in the field.
I can’t help that most places are and have been mined to death.
Now privet property is a different story but not all privet property is untouched.

Out in the wilderness there is a high probability that there are still loads and undiscovered places. But even I can’t possibly walk all the ground in my lifetime. There is a chance if you’re in the right place at the right time, if you’re lucky to stumble upon that location, like the guy with the metal detector in the link provided
In the previous post, Australia was it?

All these above are Trickys quotes

By the way if I’m delusional it’s a damn good one and for a short while I entertained that I was wrong, till I had to dowse or go absolutely broke and lose it.
I learned the hard way that there’s something to dowsing that works at least in the field, now we’ll go from there.

petre asks,

My apologies if you have already covered this, edge, but it is a very long thread. At the least, I don't recall hearing anything about this...

I wonder, is there any special requirement of a dowsing rod? Are some better than others? I'm just thinking that an easier way to frame a challenge might be to use a detectable difference in the dowsing results to identify some difference between two or more rods that would be undetectable otherwise.



You bring up a good point I haven’t discussed this but this last year I had a friend come down to my spot. We had discussed dowsing and he brought down two L-rods.
I use a Y shaped rod cut from willow with a piece of gold or silver inserted in the end.
He had got these from a friend of his in Wisconsin who claims to be an expert.
He went one step further in his theory.
He claims that he can make the Gold in the ground resonate on the atomic level with this little box.
It had quartz crystals in the box attached to a dial on front of the box that was mark in quantities of gold such as 1 once 2 once 3,5,….ect.
I think he was selling this in magazines or something.
I had seen the cable guys in Florida use simple L-rods to locate hidden cables when the markers for these cables were missing and lost, especially when their electronic devise couldn’t pin point the location of the cable. It worked for them.
They were simple coat hangers bent in that shape. With those there’s friction involved so you have to be able to hold them just right so that the movement can happen.
The idea is that they will cross themselves when you’re over the target.

I told him I didn’t buy into the theory but let me see the rods.
The rods were custom built and he did a very good job building these.
They were set in bearings the bearings were set in a plastic p.v.c. Pipe.
Into the bearings for the L-rod he used a single portable radio antenna for each side, you know the kind that allows you to rotate the antenna, you can bend it over and then rotate it in any direction.
In this way it had virtually no friction so the damn things were spinning Willie Nillie as I tried it while I walked.
It took a minute or two for me to steady them and the only way I could get them to do that was to point them down at about a 30 degree angle and let gravity hold them down in front of me.

I was walking the bank were I had about 6 or 8 hits but these were the ones that I had by passed for lack of gold.
The idea was to check them with the dredge to see if I was right about by passing them.

This is the thing, my way of dowsing can tell me, the difference between a looser spot and a winning spot.

Now for the L-rods to cross they would have to over come the gravity that held them down in front of me and what I found was that they did just that and confirmed the spots that I had chose to by pass.

Later I would dredge these spots to see if I was right, to by pass them, and that also proved to be the case.
I did these spots also because I didn’t have a place to go to next.
I would have to move my dredges for that and my camp.
So I killed time and tested myself.


Now here’s the thing they overcame gravity when they crossed, I made sure of that. They confirmed what I already knew dowsing the other way only better.
I’m going to try to do the test the same way, ”JREFs way” with a pair of L rods since they only move parallel to the ground. With the target hidden in one of ten containers to see if that method will give me a better score.

The L-rods gave me readings in the same exact places and my hands never touched the metal for a conductive in the normal sense of an electrical type of connection.
I also did this with the willow stick as I dowsed wearing rubber gloves and got a reaction to a certain area.
Which in my mind cancels out the Ideomotor effect.

The Ideomotor effect claims the reaction to be medical in explanation, such as, my sub-conscience is making my hands do the movement of the stick to occur and that the torque or the twisting of the stick is from muscles under my skin or my hands.

Even I was amazed at the reaction







curlyjoe. said,
Yes, my poor attempt at humor. But that is not the same as .b.s.

You are saying that you cannot do it in the "office" because there are too many "variables" interfering with your abilities with the rod. Therefore, you want to do a "field" test. You are not rich because you do not actually find much gold. It's just that you find more when you use the rod.
I'm just clarifying your position.

We must test what you say you can do, not what we think you should be able to do based on what you say you can do.I'm not talking .b.s. I am your friend.
I don’t think anyone gets rich mining anymore, but we have fun, hell just to be able to support a camp and sleep under the stars with a campfire is wealth that you can’t put a price on, + get some gold.
Ya can’t beat that as long as you enjoy it.

You are all also my friends per say!

George152
I decided to use that can because you can’t see through it.



GzuzKryzt

I rewrote it twice I will when I’m ready. Here’s the thing even if they test me my way on the creek they still have a way out because they leave it open ended by saying there is a formal test.
Now what does that exactly mean?
I would think we would do the same test on a different piece of property the way the first test was done but I kinda doubt it.
The way I thought it was in the dowsing test scenario was the open test was the pilimnary test and the closed was the formal test but by what they themselves write no one has passed the pilimnary test in any category.





Even if I could do it in one day, it will take more than one set of tests, according to their rules. So I really have to think about it, and hence I’m looking at the possibility of the L rods not to be as sensitive as the willow stick so maybe it will only pick out the target that’s the closest to the surface and not read so deep.
I guess I’ll be going to Radio Shack soon.


Cartoon man you know whom you is, Why aren’t you over on the Skepchick site shmusing the ladies?!



Sounds like some ones getting scared.....

[edge]

One option is JREF can tell Edge when your income from finding gold is large we will take you seriously.

I am thinking he should be able to find $3,000 worth gold per week with no mine.

In 1988 my partner and I were pulling about 10 ounces a week for 4 months.
Tim Pouge did the dowsing for us and was buying our gold. James knows Tim.
The price of gold was about $360.00 average. For fines not nuggets three quarters of what we pulled were nuggets.

He is the one that taught me how to dowse....

Now I have found that kind of ground again for next years test.
May even be better gold is $600.00 average
It's only going to take me 4 years verses the guy with the metal detector it took him 20 years, that's the differance.
Plus I work too so your point is moot.