Paul Harvey, dowsing and the US military???

20th January 2003, 05:36 PM

I live in Japan, and listen to the American Armed Forces radio (because it's in English), which includes content from NPR in the mornings. Anyway, I enjoy listening to Paul Harvey and his news commentary (although the listener must take care in separating his oftentimes jingoistic views from the actual news), which is usually well researched. This morning (Japan time), however, I was rather surprised to hear him talk about dowsing, rather seriously, stating that the US military is dedicating resourses to using it.

If this is true, I wonder what chance they have of ever finding Saddam's bunker.

Does anyone know more about this?

BTW, Paul Harvey has a website and you can listen to the commentary in question (I have no idea which one it is, but it was broadcast on Tuesday morning here, so maybe Monday evening in the US??).

http://www.paulharvey.com/

Mr. Turquoise

Ladewig · 20th January 2003, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Paul Harvey and his news commentary ... which is usually well researched.

Now that I have cleaned up the raspberry soda that I have sprayed on my keyboard, I am able to type a reply. I must take issue with the claim that Mr. Harvey's news is well researched. We are talking about a man who reported more than once that the power of prayer has been scientifically proven. According to the Usenet posters at ALT.FOLKLORE.URBAN, Mr. Harvey's main purpose in life is to allow people who don't have access to the internet to receive all the urban-legend e-mail that the rest of us receive.

20th January 2003, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Turquoise
If this is true, I wonder what chance they have of ever finding Saddam's bunker.

I would say that it's about the same chance as without using dowsing.

TechHead · 21st January 2003, 11:05 AM

First, Ladewig is right... Paul Harvey has, on several occasions, reported urban legends as true. His reporting is generally entertaining and humorous, which is the only reason I listen to him. Certainly not for accurate, well-researched reporting.

Regarding his "dowsing report", I believe that some of it is in error, or woefully out-of-date. The info I have is that, in the late 1960's, a dowser named Louis Matachia did demonstrate dowsing at Quantico, on a mock-up of a Vietnamese village. However, I don't believe he ever "trained" the Marines in dowsing, or that dowsing was ever officially sanctioned by any service. Maybe someone who knows for sure, can tell us.

It is possible that individual Marines used dowsing in Vietnam, and maybe even had some success with it. However, it would only take a few misses in a minefield to demonstrate the true value of dowsing, eh? I am unaware that any branch of the military is currently investigating dowsing. Again, maybe someone who knows, can tell us.

As for the French scientists, there tends to be pro-dowsing sympathy amongst some of them, and with some German scientists as well. Mebbe Randi needs to haul his $million over there, and see how strong their convictions are.

arcticpenguin · 21st January 2003, 01:01 PM

I am shocked to hear about this!

Paul Harvey is still alive? I used to hear him on hte radio half a lifetime ago.

TechHead · 21st January 2003, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by arcticpenguin
I am shocked to hear about this!

Paul Harvey is still alive? I used to hear him on hte radio half a lifetime ago.

He's at least 85, maybe pushing 90... been on radio for over 50 years. I expect he knew Marconi...

shemp · 21st January 2003, 03:31 PM

He's a deranged old fool who should be in a home eating mush.

Athena · 21st January 2003, 03:37 PM

Louis Matacia is a well known dowser and treasure hunter. I met him in person last year and have also discussed him within these forums. I have copies of the material from the armed services and his presentation to them. Don't know if any of those past threads are around, they usually just end up with people telling me I'm a nut anyway, so that's why I don't discuss dowsing here.

In the USA, Louis J Matacia is a surveyor who has studied dowsing for years. During the Vietnam War he was commissioned to teach dowsing skills to US Marines so that they could avoid booby traps, navigate safely through jungles and learn the whereabouts of the enemy. Soldiers reported that using the L-rod in this way saved many lives. Louis is particularly interested in the challenge of the search. Using his dowsing together with a range of scientific devices he has located lost pipes, oil, wells, caves and buried treasures. That information is from
this source

If you are seriously interested in more information on Mr. Matacia, I'd be glad to help you out. But I won't do it here and deal with the negative comments from the peanut gallery. You can PM me if interested.

shemp · 21st January 2003, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Athena
Louis Matacia is a well known dowser and treasure hunter. I met him in person last year and have also discussed him within these forums. I have copies of the material from the armed services and his presentation to them. Don't know if any of those past threads are around, they usually just end up with people telling me I'm a nut anyway, so that's why I don't discuss dowsing here.

In the USA, Louis J Matacia is a surveyor who has studied dowsing for years. During the Vietnam War he was commissioned to teach dowsing skills to US Marines so that they could avoid booby traps, navigate safely through jungles and learn the whereabouts of the enemy. Soldiers reported that using the L-rod in this way saved many lives. Louis is particularly interested in the challenge of the search. Using his dowsing together with a range of scientific devices he has located lost pipes, oil, wells, caves and buried treasures. That information is from
this source

If you are seriously interested in more information on Mr. Matacia, I'd be glad to help you out. But I won't do it here and deal with the negative comments from the peanut gallery. You can PM me if interested.

Well then, why doesn't he take a shot at the JREF million? Oh I know:

1. "He's too busy"

2. "The money isn't important"

3. "He won't get a fair testing"

4. "Randi's avoiding him"

In short, Athena, money talks and ******** walks. If he is for real, then win the million.

Regards,
Shemp, King of the Peanut Gallery

Doctor X · 21st January 2003, 03:59 PM

You mean . . . Paaaaaaaaaaaauuuuuuul Harvey?

I, too, enjoy listening to PH, but one must REALLY turn up the ******** Deflector.

Here, he is on AM radio which, sadly, hawks a lot of ********. PH does some of this hawking.

Pretend you are listening to your doddering old child. . . .

--J.D.

xouper · 21st January 2003, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Athena: Louis Matacia is a well known dowser and treasure hunter. I met him in person last year and have also discussed him within these forums. I have copies of the material from the armed services and his presentation to them. Don't know if any of those past threads are around, they usually just end up with people telling me I'm a nut anyway, so that's why I don't discuss dowsing here.

I don't blame you for not wanting to talk about dowsing on this forum anymore. People who don't substantiate their claims don't tend to be taken seriously here.

TechHead · 21st January 2003, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Athena
Louis Matacia is a well known dowser and treasure hunter. I met him in person last year and have also discussed him within these forums. I have copies of the material from the armed services and his presentation to them. Don't know if any of those past threads are around, they usually just end up with people telling me I'm a nut anyway, so that's why I don't discuss dowsing here.

I'd be interested in obtaining any material you could provide on this. I have 2 of Matacia's books, "Finding Treasure", and "Finding Treasure Auras", which barely mention the military demos. The best account I've read so far is in Chistopher Byrd's The Divining Hand.

Quote:

In the USA, Louis J Matacia is a surveyor who has studied dowsing for years. During the Vietnam War he was commissioned to teach dowsing skills to US Marines so that they could avoid booby traps, navigate safely through jungles and learn the whereabouts of the enemy. Soldiers reported that using the L-rod in this way saved many lives. Louis is particularly interested in the challenge of the search. Using his dowsing together with a range of scientific devices he has located lost pipes, oil, wells, caves and buried treasures. That information is from
this source

Well, I've seen this web page, and I disagree with the claim that he was "commissioned to teach dowsing skills to US Marines," at least according to the Byrd account. According to Byrd, it was Matacia who suggested dowsing to the Marines, and ended up giving 2 demonstrations. He was never "commisioned" to train them and, as I understand it, official interest in the technique died. There apparently was some sporadic field usage in Vietnam, but no records of results, that I know of.

It would be interesting to find some of the Marines who were involved in all this, including some that supposedly used dowsing in 'Nam to locate tunnels and booby traps.

Quote:

If you are seriously interested in more information on Mr. Matacia, I'd be glad to help you out. But I won't do it here and deal with the negative comments from the peanut gallery. You can PM me if interested.

Yup, can't disagree with that.

The Fool · 21st January 2003, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by xouper
I don't blame you for not wanting to talk about dowsing on this forum anymore. People who don't substantiate their claims don't tend to be taken seriously here.

I can relate to that. I have claimed for months that while drinking tequila in a hot-tub full of supermodels, I can talk to dead people.
So far Mr Randi has steadfastly REFUSED to set up a test for this ability. Numerous posters on this forum have volunteered to be in the control group...but Randi remains silent.

However, back to the topic, I also don't blame you for not wanting to talk about dowsing. It is the number one stupid claim in the world. It is stupid because it is so easily tested, either you can do it, or you can't. Unfortunately, nobody can do it.....lots of people can talk about it, lots of people can claim they have done it some time in the past, lots of people can create webpages claiming they can do it so that people can link the pages as support for thier own claims that it exists.

Is it to much to ask for just one of these thousands and thousands of skilled dowsers to pass a double blind test with results significantly higher than random chance? just one? just once? Until then I'm afraid the peanut gallery will reign supreme....

TechHead · 21st January 2003, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Fool

It is the number one stupid claim in the world. It is stupid because it is so easily tested, either you can do it, or you can't.

The dowsing response has fooled a lot of very intelligent folks, so I probably wouldn't rate it even in the top ten of stupids. And some types of dowsing are easily tested, some ain't. Ferinstance, if someone claims they can dowse for groundwater, how you gonna test that claim? If 1000 folks make that claim, how you gonna test 'em all?

Quote:

Unfortunately, nobody can do it.....lots of people can talk about it, lots of people can claim they have done it some time in the past, lots of people can create webpages claiming they can do it so that people can link the pages as support for thier own claims that it exists.

Oh, my.... yes people really can dowse, and they "do it" all the time. I've personally witnessed folks dowsing, and even seen them succeed. Seen 'em fail, too. Also conducted formal testing, and witnessed the alibis that go along with dowsing.

Some of the best knowledge of dowsing and how "it works", comes not from formal double-blind testing, but from informal observations of dowsers doing their stuff, and the reactions they present when they succeed, and fail. If you pay attention, you will notice that most dowsers who claim to dowse, don't believe in what they are doing, either. Most dowsers who just "do it", instead of claiming to "do it", believe in what they are doing.

shemp · 21st January 2003, 07:58 PM

I CAN DOWSE FOR BEER!

I waved a coat hanger in my house. It lead me to the kitchen, and then to the refrigerator. Imagine my surprise when I opened the door and found a 6 of Sam Adams!

It's up to you to prove that I can't!

Tricky · 21st January 2003, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TechHead

The dowsing response has fooled a lot of very intelligent folks, so I probably wouldn't rate it even in the top ten of stupids. And some types of dowsing are easily tested, some ain't. Ferinstance, if someone claims they can dowse for groundwater, how you gonna test that claim? If 1000 folks make that claim, how you gonna test 'em all?

Quite simple, in fact Randi described how many dowsers were tested at a single time. A course was set up with underground pipes. The dowsers were asked to trace the pipes. Of course, it could be argued that this isn't natural "groundwater", but all of the dowsers agreed that they could do it in advance. (They all failed.)

TechHead · 21st January 2003, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tricky

Quite simple, in fact Randi described how many dowsers were tested at a single time. A course was set up with underground pipes. The dowsers were asked to trace the pipes. Of course, it could be argued that this isn't natural "groundwater", but all of the dowsers agreed that they could do it in advance. (They all failed.)

You've just described a procedure for testing the ability to dowse for water pipes, not groundwater. It's a sure bet it will be argued that this isn't natural groundwater, especially after the dowsers have all failed to locate the pipes. Thus, you are left with a handful of dowsers, still claiming they can locate groundwater, but not pipes.

How you gonna test 'em?

justsaygnosis · 21st January 2003, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Athena
Louis Matacia is a well known dowser and treasure hunter. I met him in person last year and have also discussed him within these forums. I have copies of the material from the armed services and his presentation to them. Don't know if any of those past threads are around, they usually just end up with people telling me I'm a nut anyway, so that's why I don't discuss dowsing here.

In the USA, Louis J Matacia is a surveyor who has studied dowsing for years. During the Vietnam War he was commissioned to teach dowsing skills to US Marines so that they could avoid booby traps, navigate safely through jungles and learn the whereabouts of the enemy. Soldiers reported that using the L-rod in this way saved many lives. Louis is particularly interested in the challenge of the search. Using his dowsing together with a range of scientific devices he has located lost pipes, oil, wells, caves and buried treasures. That information is from
this source

If you are seriously interested in more information on Mr. Matacia, I'd be glad to help you out. But I won't do it here and deal with the negative comments from the peanut gallery. You can PM me if interested.

From:That source mentioned above

During the following decades a number of respected men, including the physicist, Albert Einstein, performed impressive feats with a variety of dowsing devices.

Really? That must be why none of the specifics about Einstein or his alleged experiments in dowsing are cited.

xouper · 22nd January 2003, 02:26 AM

Quote:

TechHead: You've just described a procedure for testing the ability to dowse for water pipes, not groundwater. It's a sure bet it will be argued that this isn't natural groundwater, especially after the dowsers have all failed to locate the pipes.

You'd lose that bet,

since they all used other excuses for failing. To be fair, the people who took this test all agreed beforehand that they could dowse the location of water flowing though plastic pipes buried in the ground.

You are correct that this was not a test of their ability to detect "groundwater" nor was it advertised as such. It was a test of their ability to detect water under the ground, something they all agreed they could do.

Interestingly, two of the dowsers claimed there was no groundwater beneath the plastic pipes and two of them claimed there was, though they contradicted each other as to where it was.

Details of this test, including photographs of the construction of the testing area are in Randi's book Flim Flam.

Quote:

Thus, you are left with a handful of dowsers, still claiming they can locate groundwater, but not pipes. How you gonna test 'em?

I assume that if one of these applies for the JREF challenge, a way will be found to test them. But if it turns out they are not testable, then how is it logical to conclude that they can actually do what they claim? If it can't be tested, then there is no valid evidence they can dowse. And given that every other dowser that has been tested has failed, what reason do we have for supposing "groundwater" dowsers are any different?

TechHead · 22nd January 2003, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by xouper
You'd lose that bet, since they all used other excuses for failing. To be fair, the people who took this test all agreed beforehand that they could dowse the location of water flowing though plastic pipes buried in the ground.

You are correct that this was not a test of their ability to detect "groundwater" nor was it advertised as such. It was a test of their ability to detect water under the ground, something they all agreed they could do.

In the Kassel test, I expect there were all sorts of excuses for failure. But, as I understand it, it was designed and promoted as a pipe test, regardless of what the dowsers believed they could dowse -- a sort of "general purpose" dowsing test, much like the Scheunen tests.

Quote:

I assume that if one of these applies for the JREF challenge, a way will be found to test them. But if it turns out they are not testable, then how is it logical to conclude that they can actually do what they claim? If it can't be tested, then there is no valid evidence they can dowse. And given that every other dowser that has been tested has failed, what reason do we have for supposing "groundwater" dowsers are any different?

Because groundwater dowsers are very successful at finding groundwater. We won't mention that non-dowsers are also very successful at finding groundwater.

But if a person claims that their success at locating groundwater is due to their dowsing abilities, then any test of that ability MUST be designed specifically for their claim, not for something that the challenger feels is equivalent, and easier to test. Doing so, offers up a ready-to-serve alibi when the dowser fails, even if the dowser originally agrees to the alternate test.

I'm not arguing that dowsers are really doing what they believe they are doing. On the contrary, I've done enough work in dowsing to know that it does not "really work". My comments followed Mr. Fool's statement that dowsing is "easily tested" which, in some cases, is true, like dowsing for pipes and cables. But in the case of groundwater dowsing, which is arguably the single biggest application of dowsing (certainly historically), it ain't easily tested, at all. This is a fallicy that skeptics sometimes fall into: that claim is obviously false, and is easily testable. If that were true, no one but total idiots would believe in dowsing, which is obviously not the case.

Here's another test to chew on: Mr. Treasure Dowser claims that he can locate buried gold or silver, and has actually done so in the past. However, the gold/silver is only detectable if it is "long-time buried", say, more than 20 years. It takes that long to develop a "halo". How would one test this claim?

Thangs ain't so easy as they first appear.

Ladewig · 22nd January 2003, 08:26 AM

Quote:

It is the number one stupid claim in the world. It is stupid because it is so easily tested, either you can do it, or you can't.

I can't classify it the number one stupid claim because controlled testing is not easily understood by laypeople. The positive results from uncontrolled conditions are tempting reasons for believing in dowsing.

On the other hand, I would call map dowsing the number one stupid claim in the world. Although, it is a photo finish with "internet homeopathy" - sending healing vibrations over internet connections.

TechHead · 23rd January 2003, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ladewig

I can't classify it the number one stupid claim because controlled testing is not easily understood by laypeople. The positive results from uncontrolled conditions are tempting reasons for believing in dowsing.

Also, the dowsing response is very compelling. Skeptics who haven't tried dowsing, don't understand just how strong it is.

Quote:

On the other hand, I would call map dowsing the number one stupid claim in the world. Although, it is a photo finish with "internet homeopathy" - sending healing vibrations over internet connections.

Ahhh, now we're starting to move up the Stupid Things to Believe list. With normal dowsing, you can at least argue that there might be some kind of natural force that causes the reaction. With map dowsing, you now have to believe that a piece of paper somehow holds information on what you are dowsing. Map dowsing is also one of the easiest claims to test.

"Internet homeopathy" -- never heard of that one... wonder if those on a T1 heal faster...

xouper · 23rd January 2003, 08:26 AM

Quote:

TechHead: With normal dowsing, you can at least argue that there might be some kind of natural force that causes the reaction.

And what argument would that be?

TechHead · 23rd January 2003, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by xouper
And what argument would that be?

Some groundwater dowsers believe they are sensing either an electrostatic field, or a variation in the earth's magnetic field. Actually, flowing water can generate a weak magnetic field, per magnetohydrodynamics, but groundwater only "flows", what, inches or feet per year?

Treasure dowsers believe they are sensing alterations in magnetic fields, and many use frequency generators that they believe create lines of "resonance" with buried gold or whatever, that they can follow with dowsing rods.

Map dowsing becomes super-far-fetched, because you have to believe that those supposed physical forces have somehow transferred themselves to ordinary paper, even from thousands of miles away.

Rorimack · 9th February 2003, 11:13 AM

Hi!

I just heard the argument about Mariners using succesfully dowsing in Vietnam.

I was searching for "internet evidence", but I've only found the name, Louis J Matacia , and two pro-dowsing article.
(according to them, the Matacia demonstration was of course succesfull, and invidual Marines used the method during the whole war....

)

Is there any useful document about this subject?

R.

TechHead · 9th February 2003, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rorimack
Hi!

I just heard the argument about Mariners using succesfully dowsing in Vietnam.

I was searching for "internet evidence", but I've only found the name, Louis J Matacia , and two pro-dowsing article.
(according to them, the Matacia demonstration was of course succesfull, and invidual Marines used the method during the whole war.... )

Is there any useful document about this subject?

R.

As I said in an earlier post, the best account I've found of Matacia and the Marines is in Christopher Byrd's The Divining Hand. Also a good book for dowsing in general, even for skeptics. Byrd mentions a number of USMC individuals who were involved, but I've never tried to contact any of them. Just how much dowsing was used in Vietnam, and how successful it was, has never been made clear, by any source.

Hypocolius · 9th February 2003, 07:50 PM

[quote]Originally posted by TechHead
[b]

Also, the dowsing response is very compelling. Skeptics who haven't tried dowsing, don't understand just how strong it is.

QUOTE]

Tried it, still don't believe in it. It does look impressive I'll agree, particularly when you go back over the same ground and the effects are repeated. The problem with testing claims for groundwater is that, if you drill deep enough you can find it pretty much everywhere! In some places it's nice and close to the surface. Where I worked (for a drilling Co.) in Zambia, we only had to go down 7 metres or so before we hit it, a few hundred Km's away in Botswana you might have to drill 600 metres, but it's there all the same. Without exception, whenever we drilled in a spot and didn't find water, those in the Co who believed in dowsing said we hadn't gone deep enough.

fishbob · 10th February 2003, 12:39 AM

I have met people who claim they can dowse the locations of buried utilities. On one project, I was shown by a dowser where the underground electric, gas, and water lines were. Then I had to drill 20 holes in the area. I did not happen to drill into anything bad that time. I did hit groundwater all 20 times though.

I have drilled holes into buried utilities at other locations. It is not good for the nerves.

You just can't predict the accuracy of what Old Paul spews onto the airwaves. Dowsing is bogus. Belief in dowsing is dangerous.

pupdog · 16th February 2003, 03:43 PM

I like the high-tech dowsing rod sold to some school principals & police departments--you could turn a dial to select guns, knives, drugs, etc.

20th January 2003, 05:36 PM	#1
Mr. Turquoise Guest Posts: n/a	Paul Harvey, dowsing and the US military??? I live in Japan, and listen to the American Armed Forces radio (because it's in English), which includes content from NPR in the mornings. Anyway, I enjoy listening to Paul Harvey and his news commentary (although the listener must take care in separating his oftentimes jingoistic views from the actual news), which is usually well researched. This morning (Japan time), however, I was rather surprised to hear him talk about dowsing, rather seriously, stating that the US military is dedicating resourses to using it. If this is true, I wonder what chance they have of ever finding Saddam's bunker. Does anyone know more about this? BTW, Paul Harvey has a website and you can listen to the commentary in question (I have no idea which one it is, but it was broadcast on Tuesday morning here, so maybe Monday evening in the US??). http://www.paulharvey.com/ Mr. Turquoise
Mr. Turquoise Guest Posts: n/a

20th January 2003, 09:21 PM	#3
Plutarck Guest Posts: n/a	Re: Paul Harvey, dowsing and the US military??? Quote: Originally posted by Mr. Turquoise If this is true, I wonder what chance they have of ever finding Saddam's bunker. I would say that it's about the same chance as without using dowsing.
Plutarck Guest Posts: n/a

21st January 2003, 11:05 AM	#4
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55	First, Ladewig is right... Paul Harvey has, on several occasions, reported urban legends as true. His reporting is generally entertaining and humorous, which is the only reason I listen to him. Certainly not for accurate, well-researched reporting. Regarding his "dowsing report", I believe that some of it is in error, or woefully out-of-date. The info I have is that, in the late 1960's, a dowser named Louis Matachia did demonstrate dowsing at Quantico, on a mock-up of a Vietnamese village. However, I don't believe he ever "trained" the Marines in dowsing, or that dowsing was ever officially sanctioned by any service. Maybe someone who knows for sure, can tell us. It is possible that individual Marines used dowsing in Vietnam, and maybe even had some success with it. However, it would only take a few misses in a minefield to demonstrate the true value of dowsing, eh? I am unaware that any branch of the military is currently investigating dowsing. Again, maybe someone who knows, can tell us. As for the French scientists, there tends to be pro-dowsing sympathy amongst some of them, and with some German scientists as well. Mebbe Randi needs to haul his $million over there, and see how strong their convictions are.
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55

21st January 2003, 01:01 PM	#5
arcticpenguin woo ban clan Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,717	I am shocked to hear about this! Paul Harvey is still alive? I used to hear him on hte radio half a lifetime ago.
	__________________ The power of accurate observation is frequently called cynicism by those who don't have it. - George Bernard Shaw

21st January 2003, 03:19 PM	#6
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55	Quote: Originally posted by arcticpenguin I am shocked to hear about this! Paul Harvey is still alive? I used to hear him on hte radio half a lifetime ago. He's at least 85, maybe pushing 90... been on radio for over 50 years. I expect he knew Marconi...
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55

20th January 2003, 08:06 PM	#2
Ladewig Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 8,555	Quote: Paul Harvey and his news commentary ... which is usually well researched. Now that I have cleaned up the raspberry soda that I have sprayed on my keyboard, I am able to type a reply. I must take issue with the claim that Mr. Harvey's news is well researched. We are talking about a man who reported more than once that the power of prayer has been scientifically proven. According to the Usenet posters at ALT.FOLKLORE.URBAN, Mr. Harvey's main purpose in life is to allow people who don't have access to the internet to receive all the urban-legend e-mail that the rest of us receive.

21st January 2003, 03:31 PM	#7
shemp Lotus Eater Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: walking down Madison Posts: 10,278	He's a deranged old fool who should be in a home eating mush.
	__________________ "You cannot reorganize village life to suit the village idiot." -- Frank Schaeffer

21st January 2003, 03:37 PM	#8
Athena Student Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 39	Louis Matacia Louis Matacia is a well known dowser and treasure hunter. I met him in person last year and have also discussed him within these forums. I have copies of the material from the armed services and his presentation to them. Don't know if any of those past threads are around, they usually just end up with people telling me I'm a nut anyway, so that's why I don't discuss dowsing here. In the USA, Louis J Matacia is a surveyor who has studied dowsing for years. During the Vietnam War he was commissioned to teach dowsing skills to US Marines so that they could avoid booby traps, navigate safely through jungles and learn the whereabouts of the enemy. Soldiers reported that using the L-rod in this way saved many lives. Louis is particularly interested in the challenge of the search. Using his dowsing together with a range of scientific devices he has located lost pipes, oil, wells, caves and buried treasures. That information is from this source If you are seriously interested in more information on Mr. Matacia, I'd be glad to help you out. But I won't do it here and deal with the negative comments from the peanut gallery. You can PM me if interested.
Athena Student Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 39

21st January 2003, 03:51 PM	#9
shemp Lotus Eater Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: walking down Madison Posts: 10,278	Re: Louis Matacia Quote: Originally posted by Athena Louis Matacia is a well known dowser and treasure hunter. I met him in person last year and have also discussed him within these forums. I have copies of the material from the armed services and his presentation to them. Don't know if any of those past threads are around, they usually just end up with people telling me I'm a nut anyway, so that's why I don't discuss dowsing here. In the USA, Louis J Matacia is a surveyor who has studied dowsing for years. During the Vietnam War he was commissioned to teach dowsing skills to US Marines so that they could avoid booby traps, navigate safely through jungles and learn the whereabouts of the enemy. Soldiers reported that using the L-rod in this way saved many lives. Louis is particularly interested in the challenge of the search. Using his dowsing together with a range of scientific devices he has located lost pipes, oil, wells, caves and buried treasures. That information is from this source If you are seriously interested in more information on Mr. Matacia, I'd be glad to help you out. But I won't do it here and deal with the negative comments from the peanut gallery. You can PM me if interested. Well then, why doesn't he take a shot at the JREF million? Oh I know: 1. "He's too busy" 2. "The money isn't important" 3. "He won't get a fair testing" 4. "Randi's avoiding him" In short, Athena, money talks and ******** walks. If he is for real, then win the million. Regards, Shemp, King of the Peanut Gallery
	__________________ "You cannot reorganize village life to suit the village idiot." -- Frank Schaeffer

21st January 2003, 03:59 PM	#10
Doctor X Suspended Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Of Your Posts: 1,470	You mean . . . Paaaaaaaaaaaauuuuuuul Harvey? I, too, enjoy listening to PH, but one must REALLY turn up the ****** Deflector. Here, he is on AM radio which, sadly, hawks a lot of ******. PH does some of this hawking. Pretend you are listening to your doddering old child. . . . --J.D.

21st January 2003, 04:40 PM	#11
xouper Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,189	Re: Louis Matacia Quote: Athena: Louis Matacia is a well known dowser and treasure hunter. I met him in person last year and have also discussed him within these forums. I have copies of the material from the armed services and his presentation to them. Don't know if any of those past threads are around, they usually just end up with people telling me I'm a nut anyway, so that's why I don't discuss dowsing here. I don't blame you for not wanting to talk about dowsing on this forum anymore. People who don't substantiate their claims don't tend to be taken seriously here.
xouper Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,189

21st January 2003, 05:45 PM	#12
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55	Re: Louis Matacia Quote: Originally posted by Athena Louis Matacia is a well known dowser and treasure hunter. I met him in person last year and have also discussed him within these forums. I have copies of the material from the armed services and his presentation to them. Don't know if any of those past threads are around, they usually just end up with people telling me I'm a nut anyway, so that's why I don't discuss dowsing here. I'd be interested in obtaining any material you could provide on this. I have 2 of Matacia's books, "Finding Treasure", and "Finding Treasure Auras", which barely mention the military demos. The best account I've read so far is in Chistopher Byrd's The Divining Hand. Quote: In the USA, Louis J Matacia is a surveyor who has studied dowsing for years. During the Vietnam War he was commissioned to teach dowsing skills to US Marines so that they could avoid booby traps, navigate safely through jungles and learn the whereabouts of the enemy. Soldiers reported that using the L-rod in this way saved many lives. Louis is particularly interested in the challenge of the search. Using his dowsing together with a range of scientific devices he has located lost pipes, oil, wells, caves and buried treasures. That information is from this source Well, I've seen this web page, and I disagree with the claim that he was "commissioned to teach dowsing skills to US Marines," at least according to the Byrd account. According to Byrd, it was Matacia who suggested dowsing to the Marines, and ended up giving 2 demonstrations. He was never "commisioned" to train them and, as I understand it, official interest in the technique died. There apparently was some sporadic field usage in Vietnam, but no records of results, that I know of. It would be interesting to find some of the Marines who were involved in all this, including some that supposedly used dowsing in 'Nam to locate tunnels and booby traps. Quote: If you are seriously interested in more information on Mr. Matacia, I'd be glad to help you out. But I won't do it here and deal with the negative comments from the peanut gallery. You can PM me if interested. Yup, can't disagree with that.
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55

21st January 2003, 07:00 PM	#13
The Fool Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 8,483	Re: Re: Louis Matacia Quote: Originally posted by xouper I don't blame you for not wanting to talk about dowsing on this forum anymore. People who don't substantiate their claims don't tend to be taken seriously here. I can relate to that. I have claimed for months that while drinking tequila in a hot-tub full of supermodels, I can talk to dead people. So far Mr Randi has steadfastly REFUSED to set up a test for this ability. Numerous posters on this forum have volunteered to be in the control group...but Randi remains silent. However, back to the topic, I also don't blame you for not wanting to talk about dowsing. It is the number one stupid claim in the world. It is stupid because it is so easily tested, either you can do it, or you can't. Unfortunately, nobody can do it.....lots of people can talk about it, lots of people can claim they have done it some time in the past, lots of people can create webpages claiming they can do it so that people can link the pages as support for thier own claims that it exists. Is it to much to ask for just one of these thousands and thousands of skilled dowsers to pass a double blind test with results significantly higher than random chance? just one? just once? Until then I'm afraid the peanut gallery will reign supreme....
	__________________ And what is good, Phaedrus,and what is not good. Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? R. M. Pirsig. (Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance) Lose half your IQ....Ask me how.

21st January 2003, 07:35 PM	#14
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55	Quote: Originally posted by The Fool It is the number one stupid claim in the world. It is stupid because it is so easily tested, either you can do it, or you can't. The dowsing response has fooled a lot of very intelligent folks, so I probably wouldn't rate it even in the top ten of stupids. And some types of dowsing are easily tested, some ain't. Ferinstance, if someone claims they can dowse for groundwater, how you gonna test that claim? If 1000 folks make that claim, how you gonna test 'em all? Quote: Unfortunately, nobody can do it.....lots of people can talk about it, lots of people can claim they have done it some time in the past, lots of people can create webpages claiming they can do it so that people can link the pages as support for thier own claims that it exists. Oh, my.... yes people really can dowse, and they "do it" all the time. I've personally witnessed folks dowsing, and even seen them succeed. Seen 'em fail, too. Also conducted formal testing, and witnessed the alibis that go along with dowsing. Some of the best knowledge of dowsing and how "it works", comes not from formal double-blind testing, but from informal observations of dowsers doing their stuff, and the reactions they present when they succeed, and fail. If you pay attention, you will notice that most dowsers who claim to dowse, don't believe in what they are doing, either. Most dowsers who just "do it", instead of claiming to "do it", believe in what they are doing.
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55

21st January 2003, 07:58 PM	#15
shemp Lotus Eater Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: walking down Madison Posts: 10,278	I CAN DOWSE FOR BEER! I waved a coat hanger in my house. It lead me to the kitchen, and then to the refrigerator. Imagine my surprise when I opened the door and found a 6 of Sam Adams! It's up to you to prove that I can't!
	__________________ "You cannot reorganize village life to suit the village idiot." -- Frank Schaeffer

21st January 2003, 08:02 PM	#16
Tricky Radical centrist Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 25,978	Quote: Originally posted by TechHead The dowsing response has fooled a lot of very intelligent folks, so I probably wouldn't rate it even in the top ten of stupids. And some types of dowsing are easily tested, some ain't. Ferinstance, if someone claims they can dowse for groundwater, how you gonna test that claim? If 1000 folks make that claim, how you gonna test 'em all? Quite simple, in fact Randi described how many dowsers were tested at a single time. A course was set up with underground pipes. The dowsers were asked to trace the pipes. Of course, it could be argued that this isn't natural "groundwater", but all of the dowsers agreed that they could do it in advance. (They all failed.)

21st January 2003, 08:11 PM	#17
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55	Quote: Originally posted by Tricky Quite simple, in fact Randi described how many dowsers were tested at a single time. A course was set up with underground pipes. The dowsers were asked to trace the pipes. Of course, it could be argued that this isn't natural "groundwater", but all of the dowsers agreed that they could do it in advance. (They all failed.) You've just described a procedure for testing the ability to dowse for water pipes, not groundwater. It's a sure bet it will be argued that this isn't natural groundwater, especially after the dowsers have all failed to locate the pipes. Thus, you are left with a handful of dowsers, still claiming they can locate groundwater, but not pipes. How you gonna test 'em?
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55

21st January 2003, 11:19 PM	#18
justsaygnosis Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 263	Re: Louis Matacia Quote: Originally posted by Athena Louis Matacia is a well known dowser and treasure hunter. I met him in person last year and have also discussed him within these forums. I have copies of the material from the armed services and his presentation to them. Don't know if any of those past threads are around, they usually just end up with people telling me I'm a nut anyway, so that's why I don't discuss dowsing here. In the USA, Louis J Matacia is a surveyor who has studied dowsing for years. During the Vietnam War he was commissioned to teach dowsing skills to US Marines so that they could avoid booby traps, navigate safely through jungles and learn the whereabouts of the enemy. Soldiers reported that using the L-rod in this way saved many lives. Louis is particularly interested in the challenge of the search. Using his dowsing together with a range of scientific devices he has located lost pipes, oil, wells, caves and buried treasures. That information is from this source If you are seriously interested in more information on Mr. Matacia, I'd be glad to help you out. But I won't do it here and deal with the negative comments from the peanut gallery. You can PM me if interested. From:That source mentioned above During the following decades a number of respected men, including the physicist, Albert Einstein, performed impressive feats with a variety of dowsing devices. Really? That must be why none of the specifics about Einstein or his alleged experiments in dowsing are cited.

22nd January 2003, 02:26 AM	#19
xouper Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,189	Quote: TechHead: You've just described a procedure for testing the ability to dowse for water pipes, not groundwater. It's a sure bet it will be argued that this isn't natural groundwater, especially after the dowsers have all failed to locate the pipes. You'd lose that bet, since they all used other excuses for failing. To be fair, the people who took this test all agreed beforehand that they could dowse the location of water flowing though plastic pipes buried in the ground. You are correct that this was not a test of their ability to detect "groundwater" nor was it advertised as such. It was a test of their ability to detect water under the ground, something they all agreed they could do. Interestingly, two of the dowsers claimed there was no groundwater beneath the plastic pipes and two of them claimed there was, though they contradicted each other as to where it was. Details of this test, including photographs of the construction of the testing area are in Randi's book *Flim Flam*. Quote: Thus, you are left with a handful of dowsers, still claiming they can locate groundwater, but not pipes. How you gonna test 'em? I assume that if one of these applies for the JREF challenge, a way will be found to test them. But if it turns out they are not testable, then how is it logical to conclude that they can actually do what they claim? If it can't be tested, then there is no valid evidence they can dowse. And given that every other dowser that has been tested has failed, what reason do we have for supposing "groundwater" dowsers are any different?
xouper Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,189

22nd January 2003, 07:41 AM	#20
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55	Quote: Originally posted by xouper You'd lose that bet, since they all used other excuses for failing. To be fair, the people who took this test all agreed beforehand that they could dowse the location of water flowing though plastic pipes buried in the ground. You are correct that this was not a test of their ability to detect "groundwater" nor was it advertised as such. It was a test of their ability to detect water under the ground, something they all agreed they could do. In the Kassel test, I expect there were all sorts of excuses for failure. But, as I understand it, it was designed and promoted as a pipe test, regardless of what the dowsers believed they could dowse -- a sort of "general purpose" dowsing test, much like the Scheunen tests. Quote: I assume that if one of these applies for the JREF challenge, a way will be found to test them. But if it turns out they are not testable, then how is it logical to conclude that they can actually do what they claim? If it can't be tested, then there is no valid evidence they can dowse. And given that every other dowser that has been tested has failed, what reason do we have for supposing "groundwater" dowsers are any different? Because groundwater dowsers are very successful at finding groundwater. We won't mention that non-dowsers are also very successful at finding groundwater. But if a person claims that their success at locating groundwater is due to their dowsing abilities, then any test of that ability MUST be designed specifically for their claim, not for something that the challenger feels is equivalent, and easier to test. Doing so, offers up a ready-to-serve alibi when the dowser fails, even if the dowser originally agrees to the alternate test. I'm not arguing that dowsers are really doing what they believe they are doing. On the contrary, I've done enough work in dowsing to know that it does not "really work". My comments followed Mr. Fool's statement that dowsing is "easily tested" which, in some cases, is true, like dowsing for pipes and cables. But in the case of groundwater dowsing, which is arguably the single biggest application of dowsing (certainly historically), it ain't easily tested, at all. This is a fallicy that skeptics sometimes fall into: that claim is obviously false, and is easily testable. If that were true, no one but total idiots would believe in dowsing, which is obviously not the case. Here's another test to chew on: Mr. Treasure Dowser claims that he can locate buried gold or silver, and has actually done so in the past. However, the gold/silver is only detectable if it is "long-time buried", say, more than 20 years. It takes that long to develop a "halo". How would one test this claim? Thangs ain't so easy as they first appear.
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55

22nd January 2003, 08:26 AM	#21
Ladewig Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 8,555	Quote: It is the number one stupid claim in the world. It is stupid because it is so easily tested, either you can do it, or you can't. I can't classify it the number one stupid claim because controlled testing is not easily understood by laypeople. The positive results from uncontrolled conditions are tempting reasons for believing in dowsing. On the other hand, I would call map dowsing the number one stupid claim in the world. Although, it is a photo finish with "internet homeopathy" - sending healing vibrations over internet connections.

23rd January 2003, 08:04 AM	#22
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55	Quote: Originally posted by Ladewig I can't classify it the number one stupid claim because controlled testing is not easily understood by laypeople. The positive results from uncontrolled conditions are tempting reasons for believing in dowsing. Also, the dowsing response is very compelling. Skeptics who haven't tried dowsing, don't understand just how strong it is. Quote: On the other hand, I would call map dowsing the number one stupid claim in the world. Although, it is a photo finish with "internet homeopathy" - sending healing vibrations over internet connections. Ahhh, now we're starting to move up the Stupid Things to Believe list. With normal dowsing, you can at least argue that there might be some kind of natural force that causes the reaction. With map dowsing, you now have to believe that a piece of paper somehow holds information on what you are dowsing. Map dowsing is also one of the easiest claims to test. "Internet homeopathy" -- never heard of that one... wonder if those on a T1 heal faster...
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55

23rd January 2003, 08:26 AM	#23
xouper Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,189	Quote: TechHead: With normal dowsing, you can at least argue that there might be some kind of natural force that causes the reaction. And what argument would that be?
xouper Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,189

23rd January 2003, 03:01 PM	#24
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55	Quote: Originally posted by xouper And what argument would that be? Some groundwater dowsers believe they are sensing either an electrostatic field, or a variation in the earth's magnetic field. Actually, flowing water can generate a weak magnetic field, per magnetohydrodynamics, but groundwater only "flows", what, inches or feet per year? Treasure dowsers believe they are sensing alterations in magnetic fields, and many use frequency generators that they believe create lines of "resonance" with buried gold or whatever, that they can follow with dowsing rods. Map dowsing becomes super-far-fetched, because you have to believe that those supposed physical forces have somehow transferred themselves to ordinary paper, even from thousands of miles away.
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55

9th February 2003, 11:13 AM	#25
Rorimack New Blood Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 6	Louis J Matacia ? Hi! I just heard the argument about Mariners using succesfully dowsing in Vietnam. I was searching for "internet evidence", but I've only found the name, Louis J Matacia , and two pro-dowsing article. (according to them, the Matacia demonstration was of course succesfull, and invidual Marines used the method during the whole war.... ) Is there any useful document about this subject? R.
Rorimack New Blood Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 6

9th February 2003, 06:26 PM	#26
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55	Re: Louis J Matacia ? Quote: Originally posted by Rorimack Hi! I just heard the argument about Mariners using succesfully dowsing in Vietnam. I was searching for "internet evidence", but I've only found the name, Louis J Matacia , and two pro-dowsing article. (according to them, the Matacia demonstration was of course succesfull, and invidual Marines used the method during the whole war.... ) Is there any useful document about this subject? R. As I said in an earlier post, the best account I've found of Matacia and the Marines is in Christopher Byrd's The Divining Hand. Also a good book for dowsing in general, even for skeptics. Byrd mentions a number of USMC individuals who were involved, but I've never tried to contact any of them. Just how much dowsing was used in Vietnam, and how successful it was, has never been made clear, by any source.
TechHead Scholar Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 55

9th February 2003, 07:50 PM	#27
Hypocolius Muse Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 538	[quote]Originally posted by TechHead [b] Also, the dowsing response is very compelling. Skeptics who haven't tried dowsing, don't understand just how strong it is. QUOTE] Tried it, still don't believe in it. It does look impressive I'll agree, particularly when you go back over the same ground and the effects are repeated. The problem with testing claims for groundwater is that, if you drill deep enough you can find it pretty much everywhere! In some places it's nice and close to the surface. Where I worked (for a drilling Co.) in Zambia, we only had to go down 7 metres or so before we hit it, a few hundred Km's away in Botswana you might have to drill 600 metres, but it's there all the same. Without exception, whenever we drilled in a spot and didn't find water, those in the Co who believed in dowsing said we hadn't gone deep enough.
Hypocolius Muse Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 538

10th February 2003, 12:39 AM	#28
fishbob Seasonally Disaffected Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chilly Undieville Posts: 4,697	I have met people who claim they can dowse the locations of buried utilities. On one project, I was shown by a dowser where the underground electric, gas, and water lines were. Then I had to drill 20 holes in the area. I did not happen to drill into anything bad that time. I did hit groundwater all 20 times though. I have drilled holes into buried utilities at other locations. It is not good for the nerves. You just can't predict the accuracy of what Old Paul spews onto the airwaves. Dowsing is bogus. Belief in dowsing is dangerous.
	__________________ When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder Arlen Specter to Alberto Gonzales: "You may be treading on your interdiction and violating common sense, Mr. Attorney General." I hate bigots.

16th February 2003, 03:43 PM	#29
pupdog Muse Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 627	I like the high-tech dowsing rod sold to some school principals & police departments--you could turn a dial to select guns, knives, drugs, etc.
	__________________ Professor Pupdog