Double slit experiment, i.e Skeptik experimentation

[ledgehammer]

This has been mentioned on another thread, but felt it may be worthwhile to add the video of the experiment:



The video shows one of many quantum experiments where in the observed has an influence on the effects of the experiment, this of course has a major significance on experimentation as well as results, and I think it defies a dogma used by skeptiks in unsuitable dowsing experiments, this point alone may significantly influence the results of a skeptical experiment performed by agenda based skeptiks, and possibly in an unintentional means.

The mindset of dowsing is crucial to explaining how it works:

The book "the disciplines of dowsing" goes into dowsing mindsets, but what I should perhaps specify is that when dowsing its the blind, unquestioning follower, not leader: mindset - some dowsers see it that their rods are like reins to a horse and that the horse does the dowsing (a perception not actual). This is the mindset while dowsing, after the dowsing, you have the record the results, using paper string or other means, the best way it to get somebody else to do it - if you can and try and keep them out of your mindset, perhaps another skill in itself.

Getting a purpose to your work, is where the scientist, logical or leader mindset comes in, so after the dowsing you should reflect back and conclude your findings in an analytical approach, then you can plan the next series of actions which may give you a suitable conclusion. Then if you dowse again, you have to free yourself and return to the dowsing mindset. If you merely dowse, and continue to do so, you can just dowse - believe me I have done, and often I have found amazing places this way, but at the end of it, if you want something credible - i.e the shape and size of something, whether it be underground tunnels or water lines, or something less tangible, but often with the same intensity of water for example - the same rules apply, other than you cannot check it without using alternative dowsers - rather than maps or other physical methods.

I used to dowse and mark out areas with string and pegs, and dowse it again, but what I found (and this may be consistent with your point), is you just dowse the string and pegs, probably because of the strong and pegs.

I used to dowse in churches, and dowse for the pews while blindfolded and count the times the rods swung open, they always matched - I would love to put that down to the ideometer effect but its simply not possible unless somehow my subconscious knew the layout of the pews, I tried it again and started from out side and with so many paces away and got the same results - just in case. Through some basic experimentation the ideometer effect doesn't fit and is an excuse by the skeptiks to explain as such.

Fair enough that dowsing cannot be proved but with all of this skeptisim, surely science tells us that with the claim that dowsing doesn't work, this must also be supported with evidence and the evidence doesn't cut the mustard, one of the convenient scientist dogmas perverting the methodology of science.

The dualism of pseudo science and science is a compelling one, science assumes a few things - like consciousness is not part of the environment, therefore it cannot influence it, like memories stored in the brain, another dogma. There is not evidence for this probably because its not true, especially when you look into biology and the gaps and the behaviour of nature in terms of habits and environments, the excuse being that its "chemical". The experiments that disprove dowsing I have seen take this variable out of the equation as its assumed. Likewise the quantum realisation that the observer of an experiment can influence the behaviour of light, or other experimental factors could also have an influence, so a skeptical experiment devised and recorded and witnessed by believers should also be devised if we are to follow the scientific method correctly, but you don't see this other than used as examples of pseudo scientist accusation.

best

Tom