Mark, thanks for posting that. The author of that article is a behavioral physiologist with no claimed expertise in the physical sciences. He presented his paper at the second annual skeptics conference in 1998, not in a science journal or before a scientific gathering. He does not claim to have done any empirical research on the subject. The Munich study refutes the four most common scientific objections to an empirical basis for dowsing. Professor Enright does not respond to the critique of the objections in His article. His critique of the Munich University study seems to be based on a fear that if any empirical validity can be proven for dowsing, it opens the door to a paranormal basis for the results. He also does not mention the scientific testing of the skilled dowsers results in finding actual water vein and underground river locations in arid regions in multiple locations around The world. The data from the Munich study indicate that skilled dowsers were providing more accurate locations, and predicting depth and flow rates more accurately than geotechnical test equipment using seismological testing, and long wave electromagnetic radiation detection. I don't see the relevance of his argument against the paranormal, because the Munich study offers various technical and biological theories as explanation for the success of the dowsers in the study. They don't at any point posit or support a paranormal explanation for the empirical data gathered in the study. I found the article interesting, but this opinion piece does not negate the findings of the scientists who participated in the Munich study.
The Randi foundation is chaired by the magician James Randi. It is an advocacy and grant writing foundation with two employees including Randi. They do not employ scientists. Their goal is advocacy against paranormal phenomena. They are not a technology or science research company. According to Wikipedia, the challenge ended in 2015. Since it was not administered by an independent third party scientific group, it was nothing more than a publicity stunt in my opinion.
In the article cited, Professor Enright concluded his paper with the following thought:
"Because of the vigor, however, with which Professor Betz and colleagues defended their positive conclusions (Betz et al. 1996), and in view of the discouraging history of other claims about the occult, one may have residual doubts, as do I, about whether reason will prevail in this arena (Enright 1996)."
Indeed, the German scientists involved in the Munich study intend to work with other disciplines to study the biophysical and physics phenomena involved in dowsing to create AI or algorithms which would incorporate the superior predictive capabilities of dowsers compared to current geotechnical equipment to create technology that can duplicate the dowsers success in real world geo fault and discontinuity detection which seems to be the dowser's basis for finding water in arid regions.
Maybe when technology is developed that functions competively with the best dowsers, the paranormal skeptics can relax. Or not.
The Munich study remains the most definitive scientific study on this subject. There is unlikely to be funding for any more definitive study in the near future. We can certainly have different opinions on this subject, and still respect the integrity and intelligence of those with a different view. Thanks for the discussion, Mark, and everyone else, it is very interesting and relevant to rural living.
Upload one or more videos to your post. Photo and video filesizes should be less than 5MB. Formats allowed are gif, jpg, png, ogg, mp4, mov, and avi. Be sure to use filenames without spaces or special characters, and filetypes of 3 digits lower case.
We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]
Today's Featured Article - Good As New - by Bill Goodwin. In the summer of 1995, my father, Russ Goodwin, and I acquired the 1945 Farmall B that my grandfather used as an overseer on a farm in Waynesboro, Georgia. After my grandfather’s death in 1955, J.P. Rollins, son of the landowner, used the tractor. In the winter 1985, while in his possession the engine block cracked and was unrepairable. He had told my father
... [Read Article]
Latest Ad:
2022 John Deere 5045E, 4wd, front end loader and 3rd function with grapple. 120 hrs, 55k new, must sell
[More Ads]
All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.
