It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Divining rod used to find missing marine

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2008 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Try it, It works. Are you to busy to step outside with a metal coat hanger cut in two? Why sit here and argue about it when many people including myself can do it and would prove it to you if you were here. Science has explained how it works most Scientist just doubt it because they are ignorant.




posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vanitas
It may be "anecdotal" - and by definition it is - to all those who weren't there. Whether anecdotal reports should be disregarded - especially a priori, as it is done in pseudo-scientific circles, is a different question altogether...
More importantly, though - because it refers specifically to the experience related by the poster (and hence to my reply) - the person who experienced this first-hand doesn't need any studies to "confirm" what he/she SAW...


This is where i think your understanding of science is a bit blurrred. The fact that someone saw something doesn't mean anything. That is why anecdotal evidence, regardless from who it comes, the observer or performer, is completely irrelevant.

The brain is subject to many fallacies, which is why anecdotal evidence is not scientific.

If this phenomenon is real, then wouldn't you expect "dowsers" to be able to perform such feats under objective circumstances, where anecdotal evidence is disregarded? Guess how many times "dowsers" have failed to find water under scientific parameters? EVERYTIME! How do you explain that?


And by the way: EVERY evaluation of anything is "purely subjective"...


This is just not true! That's why science has double blind testing and the scientific method. I suggest you read up on that.



[edit on 15-1-2008 by LuDaCrIs]



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sky watcher
Try it, It works. Are you to busy to step outside with a metal coat hanger cut in two? Why sit here and argue about it when many people including myself can do it and would prove it to you if you were here. Science has explained how it works most Scientist just doubt it because they are ignorant.


Well, you are right that science has explained it, but I think in a way you're probably not going to like. It is nothing but a case of confirmation bias, shear luck, involuntary motor behavior and post hoc reasoning.

To say that scientists doubt it because they are ignorant is ignorant in it of itself!



posted on Jan, 15 2008 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Im sure he wasnt hard to find considering he/she is a marine ................they was bound to be wet

sorry couldnt resit

Now some hard ass marine is gonna' come on and say " Who you calling wet Mo-Fo"

lol

EDIT: she not sge AKA typo

[edit on 15-1-2008 by N.B.A.Y.S.O.H]



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 11:55 AM
link   
if you ask me i say the wife knew more then what they say. she made a deal to turn her husband in. she didnt kill her but she helped cover it up. the sheriff came up with this far fetched idea to help hide her involment in breaking the case. her name will never show up in a report and she will never have to testify in court. when cops make deals those making the deal never get dixclosed to the public unless defence attorenys bring it out then the court seals the records. so if your looking to talk about something talk about how kooky that sheriff has to be to think people are going to beleive his far out story, why not just say puff the magic dragon told him the story.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sky watcher
I call BS on this one. Dowsing is to find water not holes, I know I can do it. It was a gift handed down to me from my grandfather. I used it to find my sewer line that ran out of my house. If the Sheriff did use dowsing he was picking up the water in her body. I hope they fry the person responsible for killing that young woman and her baby.


I beg to differ here as I have used rods for almost anything. I helped a farmer a month ago to a broken piece off of his tracter. I have used it mostly for metal. Lots of top pops off cans.



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by LuDaCrIs

Originally posted by Vanitas




The brain is subject to many fallacies, which is why anecdotal evidence is not scientific. If this phenomenon is real, then wouldn't you expect "dowsers" to be able to perform such feats under objective circumstances, where anecdotal evidence is disregarded? Guess how many times "dowsers" have failed to find water under scientific parameters? EVERYTIME! How do you explain that?

And by the way: EVERY evaluation of anything is "purely subjective"...
This is just not true! That's why science has double blind testing and the scientific method. I suggest you read up on that.




[edit on 15-1-2008 by LuDaCrIs]



I can guarantee that I will and can find water underground using Dowsing. Scientist always bash what they don't understand. I have better things to do than to sit here and try to BS you about it. I have used it and it works for me and I only tried it when I needed to find my sewer pipe in my yard when I couldn't find it any other way, I remembered my grandmother telling me how my grandfather could dowse and helped people find places to dig wells that way. So I tried it and found my pipe when I and my friend who is a plumber with a probe stick could not find it any other way.

[edit on 26-1-2008 by Sky watcher]



posted on Jan, 26 2008 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sky watcher
I can guarantee that I will and can find water underground using Dowsing.


Your bound to find water pretty much anywhere you dig. If you're not telling people exactly how deep the water is, it's basically a sure hit--there is something called a water table.



Scientist always bash what they don't understand.


They have tried to understand it and no meaningful results have come up. Why is that? Why is it these people can't perform their supposed powers in the face of objective experiments that they agree on prior to testing? How do you explain that? Their powers just knowingly disappear when they know they are getting put to the test?


I have better things to do than to sit here and try to BS you about it. I have used it and it works for me and I only tried it when I needed to find my sewer pipe in my yard when I couldn't find it any other way, I remembered my grandmother telling me how my grandfather could dowse and helped people find places to dig wells that way. So I tried it and found my pipe when I and my friend who is a plumber with a probe stick could not find it any other way.


That's a great story. Really. But it still doesn't explain how or why it works. Again, I go back to the point that this could have been shear luck and a confirmation bias. How many times have you tried this? How many times did you miss? How effective are you? Do you want to win a million dollars?



posted on Jan, 27 2008 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Maybe we are reading too much into the word "devining rod." Maybe the sherriff uses his coat hanger tool to feel the dirt beneath him for irregularities that would indicate that the ground beneath was disturbed by activities like digging a grave. For example, the ground above a grave may feel soft, hard, or spongy.

The sherriff may have tried to explain to the reporter how he uses his tool and how it works. The reporter may have misunderstood the sherriff or the reporter may have chosen to use the word "devining rod" because the reporter felt the sherriff was describing a "devining rod." The reporter could have also understood perfectly well how the tool worked, but could have chosen to use the word "devining rod" because the reporter did not feel he had a better word to describe the tool.

Another possibility is that the sherriff did not explain how the tool worked at all. The reporter could have erroneously assumed the sherriff was using a devining rod, rather than using a probe the ground for irregularities.



posted on Mar, 13 2008 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Vanitas
 




So... any news on this?

(I mean the controversial method chosen, not the case itself.)



posted on Mar, 13 2008 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Dowsing is an interesting concept to study on your own. I once knew a somewhat crazy lady (my friend's mom) who use to use dowsing rods to find anything, the lost remote control, the keys, one time she lost her wedding ring and found it in the back yard, barely visible, ive tried it a few times, i have actual dowsing rods though, not makeshift ones, but it's worked about 50 % of the time, to find about anything. . . but i will definitly be thinking about using them if i lose anything, and post u guys and see if it works. .. haha



to add one more thing, it also works if u tie a key to the end of a string, and it will swing in the direction where your missing item is. . . so i've heard. . .


[edit on 13-3-2008 by immedicated]



posted on Mar, 13 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by immedicated
 


Well, if it worked for the good ol' sheriff, I can't see why it wouldn't work for you... ;-)


P.S. I meant to inquire after the news in this particular case - only, not about Maria Lauterbach or any of the people involved, but on the developments, if any, regarding the sheriff's use of a divining rod.



new topics




 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join