Anticipated Solar activity

[Qiaozhi]

Mike , as you already know from your own field experience, a fluctuating "Strength of field", affects the LRL Signal causing it to lose detection of the target's SOF, and drift off target.

In my experience, the time it takes for sufficient operational "strength of field" to return to the target, can be measured in seconds,minutes, hours, or days. I know of no way to predict the longevity of the SMI affect on an LRL operation.

However, under the "What has already been done, can be done" category, the overriding SOF of SMI surrounding a target field can be blocked electronically, and the Target field can continuously be detected with the LRL without signal drift, or loss of signal during periods of SMI interference.

Several dozen DB tests has shown this electronic device to be effective. It is not for sale, or intended for sale. Dell

http://www.dellomnitron.com

Dell - you wouldn't recognise a double-blind test if you fell over it.

Both you (and Mike) are classic victims of the Dowsing Delusion.

http://ade651gt200scamfraud.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/dowsing-illusion-and-delusion.html

[Dell Winders]

Qiaozhi, It's a good thing no intelligent person takes your rants seriously, especially when you use someones stupid personal grudge blog to try to give yourself credibility. My name,or products are not mentioned so it doesn't apply.

The DB tests I've conducted are repeatable. All you have to do is conduct your own and learn the truth for your self, or forever wallow in your own ignorance. It's your choice.

I'm sorry you dislike having valid, tested & confirmed information posted on this forum. Dell

[Dell Winders]

Thanks Dell. I see they sell an external magnifier (10X) coil for $65. The model I have does not have a coil input. I guess you just place the coil near the meter.

I have no idea. I haven't been to his site since I purchased a Magnetometer from him two years ago. Dell

[Qiaozhi]

Qiaozhi, It's a good thing no intelligent person takes your rants seriously, especially when you use someones stupid personal grudge blog to try to give yourself credibility. My name,or products are not mentioned so it doesn't apply.

The DB tests I've conducted are repeatable. All you have to do is conduct your own and learn the truth for your self, or forever wallow in your own ignorance. It's your choice.

I'm sorry you dislike having valid, tested & confirmed information posted on this forum. Dell

No-one said your products were listed on that site, but you clearly don't want to hear true statements like this one:
"As we have tried to point out before, dowsing has been tested under controlled conditions again and again and again. Guess what? It never works as claimed! NEVER! Bit like homeopathy or those other cons, the self proclaimed psychics. It has been thoroughly explained as the Ideomotor effect (feel free to google that if you do not know what it is)."

However many times you claim to have performed double-blind testing, it doesn't alter the fact that your version of DB testing bears no resemblance to any known properly controlled scientific test.

"Science can put a man on the moon (and bring him back), yet science just can't quite catch anyone dowsing under controlled conditions. We are talking about a power that could change the very course of human events, but this power is very shy and never appears when scientists are watching."

If the effect doesn't show up during DB testing, then it's simply a trick of the mind. Enjoy wallowing in your continued delusion.

[Dell Winders]

Qiaozhi, Tell us about all the DB tests you have conducted as an authority on the subject, and show us your scientific credentials that support your claims so that you have some credibility other than showing off as the forum clown? Dell

[Mike(Mont)]

I will not argue with Q about dowsing. It is not reliable and usually inaccurate.

Now don't confuse dowsing with the MFD or HID (Harmonic Induction Discrimination). These are not dowsing although they are similar and most people do not know the difference because they cannot do either. I've said it before many people claim to be dowsers or even MFD users and they are not. Anyone can get on the internet and put a mark on a map or photo and claim they are an expert. The internet is full of imposters. I won't name names this time.

And then there is the fact that none of the techniques work all the time. Or even if they do, the person using them falters. No one is perfect although some pskeptics think they are.

And don't forget the double-blind tests are al designed by skeptics with the intentions of proving it can't possibly work. If you think the skeptic doublr-blind tests are a true test, you are delusional.

[Qiaozhi]

I will not argue with Q about dowsing. It is not reliable and usually inaccurate.

The fact is it's totally unreliable and always inaccurate ... or at least, with the same accuracy as guessing.

Anyone can get on the internet and put a mark on a map or photo and claim they are an expert. The internet is full of imposters. I won't name names this time.

Now the self-proclaimed map dowsers are all wondering who you're referring to.

And don't forget the double-blind tests are al designed by skeptics with the intentions of proving it can't possibly work.

Wrong. Double-blind testing was designed by scientists to eliminate both conscious and unconscious bias, and which is the reason why dowsing always fails the test. It has nothing to do with having been designed by skeptics intent on proving it cannot possibly work.

Dowsers (like Dell) who have been tested under double-blind conditions and failed, will always rubbish this type of testing. It's better to live in ignorance than to discover the truth.

[Qiaozhi]

Qiaozhi, Tell us about all the DB tests you have conducted as an authority on the subject, and show us your scientific credentials that support your claims so that you have some credibility other than showing off as the forum clown? Dell

Oh dear - name calling yet again.

You are well aware (or should be, after being told numerous times) that it is not possible to prove a negative. It is up to the teller of the fantastic tale to supply the evidence, and (in this case) the evidence is sorely lacking. When you can pass a properly controlled scientific double-blind test, then perhaps others will stand up and take notice. Results that are no better than guessing, or fail at the slightest excuse (the latest being increased solar activity) are basically worse than useless.

[Dell Winders]

Qiaozhi, you continue to be the most self disillusioned person on this forum.

Please,by all means tell us your Scientific back ground, and about any kind of DB tests you have ever conducted? Stop dodging the question.

Dowsers (like Dell) who have been tested under double-blind conditions and failed, will always rubbish this type of testing. It's better to live in ignorance than to discover the truth

I see you are still perpetrating lies and false information. If you are referring to the DB tests I claimed to have been conducted by Randi, that was on an MFD, not my Dowsing ability.

Randi, publicly denied that he never ever conducted any such test at any time, or at any place on this earth. So according to him there never was a test.

So Qiaozhi, exactly what DB Mental Dowsing test are you claiming I failed? Were you there? Are you intentionally telling lies about me, or are you delusional? Dell

[Mike(Mont)]

Dell, Randi must have been shaking in his shorts when you hit the target so many times. "More testing is necessary." means he knew damned well you were nowhere near random chance. By further testing he hoped he could lower your score. He wasn't worried about the money because the lawyers had a catch-all phrase in there--"The final decision to award the prize will be decided by the panel of experts." In other words they NEVER had to pay for any reason. The test was to prove the supernatural. Well, if you did it then it ain't supernatural. Just totally phony coming and going.

[Dell Winders]

Oh dear - name calling yet again.

You are well aware (or should be, after being told numerous times) that it is not possible to prove a negative. It is up to the teller of the fantastic tale to supply the evidence, and (in this case) the evidence is sorely lacking. When you can pass a properly controlled scientific double-blind test, then perhaps others will stand up and take notice. Results that are no better than guessing, or fail at the slightest excuse (the latest being increased solar activity) are basically worse than useless.

Why are you dodging the question? No one is expecting you to prove a negative. Just tell us about your Scientific background, and about the DB tests you have conducted on anything?

According to you, only Scientist are qualified to create and conduct DB tests, so inform us of your qualifications? Dell

[Qiaozhi]

I see you are still perpetrating lies and false information. If you are referring to the DB tests I claimed to have been conducted by Randi, that was on an MFD, not my Dowsing ability.

Randi, publicly denied that he never ever conducted any such test at any time, or at any place on this earth. So according to him there never was a test.

From the JREF forums:
"In 1987, Randi tested a Mr. Dell Winders of Haines City, FL for dowsing ability. According to Mr. Winders, he correctly dowsed 8 of 12 times, which was statistically very significant for that particular test protocol."

Except for one very important point ..... there is no evidence to support this claim. How convenient.

Also, as it must have slipped your mind, an MFD consists of a signal transmitter and a pair of "receiver" L-rods. In case you're still slightly confused, L-rods are another term used to describe dowsing rods.

[Qiaozhi]

Why are you dodging the question?

Which part of "you cannot prove a negative" did you not understand?

By the way, I'm not the one making fantastic claims, so I don't have to prove anything.

I noticed that your selective memory conveniently eliminates the parts you don't want to see, or you purposely misread posts to fit your own agenda, You do not have to be a scientist to carry out a double-blind test. Anyone can do it. The test however must be done using a proper scientifically controlled protocol. Maybe that's why you're having problems.

Of course, it's much easier to simply make up a new excuse, such as increased solar activity.

[Mike(Mont)]

Q, you read too much skepticpedia. You eat that crap with a spoon.

[Dell Winders]

Which part of "you cannot prove a negative" did you not understand?

By the way, I'm not the one making fantastic claims, so I don't have to prove anything.

I noticed that your selective memory conveniently eliminates the parts you don't want to see, or you purposely misread posts to fit your own agenda, You do not have to be a scientist to carry out a double-blind test. Anyone can do it. The test however must be done using a proper scientifically controlled protocol. Maybe that's why you're having problems.

Of course, it's much easier to simply make up a new excuse, such as increased solar activity.

What Excuse? Solar activity cycles are a Scientific fact. Randi stated there was no Solar activity at that time. Scientist reported there was. One of them was lieing.

What agenda? What problems? I don't know of any. Are you hearing voices in your head telling you this?

Again,you are NOT asked to prove a negative. Just answers about any kind of DB tests you have ever conducted, and what is your Scientific back ground? Is this what you regard as a negative that can't be proved?

Why are you evading the questions? Dell