Post Reply
Page 5 of 5  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5
Switch to Forum Live View Most valuable ounce of gold in the world
2 years ago  ::  Mar 11, 2012 - 1:18PM #41
mountain_man
Posts: 39,147

Mar 11, 2012 -- 1:00PM, christine3 wrote:

You are mistaken.


Then all of science is mistaken. If you wish to claim that science is wrong, then go ahead, but I'm not about to be so arrogant.


Besides, you have stated that you live in another state, not CA.


You are confused. I have never claimed to be living in any other state than California. I was born and raised here. Again, you are seriously and considerably confused.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 11, 2012 - 1:22PM #42
mountain_man
Posts: 39,147

Mar 11, 2012 -- 1:08PM, IreneAdler wrote:

Uh-oh. When did Yosemite relocate?


Yosemite has been right were it is for the last 100 million years or so. I did help them move Half Dome to the other side of the Valley. It looks much better there.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 11, 2012 - 1:24PM #43
IreneAdler
Posts: 2,849

Mar 11, 2012 -- 1:22PM, mountain_man wrote:


Mar 11, 2012 -- 1:08PM, IreneAdler wrote:

Uh-oh. When did Yosemite relocate?


Yosemite has been right were it is for the last 100 million years or so. I did help them move Half Dome to the other side of the Valley. It looks much better there.





Whew!


Nice touch on the Half Dome project. Wink


 


Irene.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 11, 2012 - 1:28PM #44
christine3
Posts: 7,005

Mar 11, 2012 -- 12:12PM, mountain_man wrote:

Of course your pendulum was wrong.




There are reasons for pendulum answers to be wrong.  That ALL dowsers can be proven incompetent, is NOT one of the reasons.  If that were the case, there would be no successes at all using pendulums or any other dowsing tool.


For instance, Mathematics is a tool and people using math can be completely off with their computations simply by not setting up the problem correctly.  There is no difference, none.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 11, 2012 - 1:33PM #45
IreneAdler
Posts: 2,849

Mar 11, 2012 -- 1:28PM, christine3 wrote:


Mar 11, 2012 -- 12:12PM, mountain_man wrote:

Of course your pendulum was wrong.




There are reasons for pendulum answers to be wrong.  That ALL dowsers can be proven incompetent, is NOT one of the reasons.  If that were the case, there would be no successes at all using pendulums or any other dowsing tool.






It’s not a matter of success or failure but the rate of success.  One should be able to show rate of dowsing success is better than chance.  Even chance gets things right at times.


Irene.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 11, 2012 - 1:42PM #46
mountain_man
Posts: 39,147

Mar 11, 2012 -- 1:28PM, christine3 wrote:

There are reasons for pendulum answers to be wrong.


They will always be wrong unless you happen to guess correctly. The pendulum is irrelevant, it's only your guesses.


That ALL dowsers can be proven incompetent, is NOT one of the reasons.


I didn't say that dowsing had anything to do with pendulums. Neither one is a good way to arrive at the correct answer or to find anything.


If that were the case, there would be no successes at all using pendulums or any other dowsing tool.


Now, you're catching on. Either one has a success rate equal to that of chance.


For instance, Mathematics is a tool .....


A tool that has nothing what so ever to do with what you're claiming.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 12, 2012 - 10:15AM #47
CharikIeia
Posts: 8,301

Thanks for explaining, Christine3!


My take on such practises is that they are fancy ways of drawing random numbers, speaking as the statistician that I am. This is most obvious when looking at Tarot, but also in reading tea leaves, or the I Ching.


The pendulum and dousing rod belong to the same category. They generate a mixture of internal tendencies of the "user / performer" and randomness inherent in the procedure itself. The task is how to interpret such a mixture.


The outcome of such procedures, like the outcome of a Rorschach test (same type of procedure in my view), can tell quite a lot about the internal states of the user / performer / test person. As such, there is truth to it, certainly.


As the statistician that I am, I am quite intrigued by the way randomness is being utilised outside the mathematical disciplines. Another instance are the cut-up and fold-in techniques of re-arranging text material for literary purposes, as practised by the Dadaists and William S. Burroughs.


This is great stuff.


In my view, only the use of randomness opens us up to completely new experiences. It is a tool from heaven, so to speak ;-)

tl;dr
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Mar 19, 2012 - 11:01PM #48
rangerken
Posts: 16,406

This thread was moved from the Hot topics Zone

Libertarian, Conservative, Life member of the NRA and VFW
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 5 of 5  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook