Is dowsing a reliable technique for finding well sites?

[JohnDubYa]

RE: "I think one could dowse for anything."

Dirt? If so, do the rods go completely wild?

 

[kcballer21]

"Pendulum dowsing: Shop and compare..."

I love the advertisements on the top of these specific forum pages. There is a lot of money to be made over something that captures the imagination, even if it only exists in the imagination.

 

[Arctic Fox]

RE: "I think one could dowse for anything."

Dirt? If so, do the rods go completely wild?

They wouldn’t move.

Funny thing is, if you try to find something that’s everywhere or doesn’t exist, nothing happens. If you are trying to find a lost tool, and you're searching for it in your yard, but you left it at your son's house 3 states away... the rods usually won’t point to anywhere. If by some strange chance that they do, you’ll have a long walk to get your tool. :)

Seems like it also works on a system of logic; I found a stolen truck in a city of 800,000 people... but someone was driving me around the city. If I had been on foot (the truck being 11 miles away), the rods would never have moved. ie: It would be logical to say that I’m not going to walk 11 miles to find this truck.

If I try to find dirt or air... that would be illogical. :D

 

[poolwin2001]

If dowsing is real,Then we need not depend on the Arabs for Oil OR Invade Iraq.

 

[Arctic Fox]

That is correct.

I've never thought of dowsing for oil, but I don’t see why a Geophysicist trained to dowse, couldn’t have a better chance of finding successful reserves...

 

[Chronos]

Why geophysicists? Their scientific training would not make them good dowsers. They would waste too much time looking for promising geological formations.

 

[Arctic Fox]

I can dowse for water because I know what water does and its locations underground (3'-1200').

If I try to find oil, the problem is that I've no idea where it could be. In my mind, I might try to imagine finding oil at 4 miles deep... I have no idea if oil is down that far, or if it's closer to the surface. I may be searching all over the place until I actually find oil at 4 miles down.

If a geophysicists knows that oil only hides at .5 miles down, s/he would have a better chance at finding it - especially if there is absolutely no way oil could be down 4 miles. (I don't know this)


Another thought is that water is everywhere. I can find water with no problem. But what if the people digging the well don't want to go more than 400'? In my mind I think of looking for water with the idea that it has to be 400' or closer to the surface.

Or, if I'm looking for waterlines, I can try and find a pipe 15' down, but I know that's not going to happen. If I'm dowsing for a pipe 3-5' in the ground, I can make the search a lot easier - because I already know the pipe's approximate depth.

Does any of this make sense?

 

[Xybot]

Discussion is futile

...Until a proper double blind experiment has been performed and peer reviewed. That said my Grandfather was a very good dowser and from my own experience at finding groundwater I could almost gaurentee I'd hit water 3-4 metres down from any low spot on the land I own. Basically that was where the water table lay, I'm sure this doesn't necessarily hold true for all spots, but I think you'd be surprised at how much water there is under there.

Just as a side note I seem to recall that one of the worlds largest fresh water rivers runs below the Sahara desert, can anyone else confirm this?