Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hipopp
...I also have at my disposal the services of a friend whose husband was an extremely successful Water Diviner and the Rangertell Examiner will be compared to that process as well in answer to the doubts of some on this forum.
|
Hi Hippop,
I think Qiaozhi is right, in that a double-blind test is the most scientific method to test if you want accurate results. I must add, that using dowsing to verify a find seems like a way of avoiding verifying the find. The only real way to verify the find is to dig a hole and recover the target. Isn't this the way metal detectors are tested? You dig the target and see how deep it was buried to indicate the range, and also you identify the target to see if the detector showed the correct indication of what kind of target you found. But most important, recovering a target will give tangible proof that the device is useful for finding targets.
For example, if you use a treasure locator to find targets for an hour, and you find 5 places where the locator says there is a target, then you will dig 5 holes to see what you found. You should keep tract of how many holes you dug and how deep, then how many targets you found and how deep, and if the locator identified the target correctly. Also take note of how many empty holes you dug. This will be good information to tabulate to figure percentages of accuracy, even if it is not a double blind test.
Think about it.... wouldn't it be easier to believe that the locator found treasure if you dig it up and hold it in your hand, than if you verify it is there by a dowsing expert who says he got a signal?
Best wishes,
J_P