Trees and stones with powers to throw?

close
more_vert
Sweep S
Sweep May 20, 2012 01:04:45
Replying to tiompan

tiompan wrote:
Sweep wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Sensible post Sweep I only slightly disagree on one point /suggestion .
"Nor is there any doubt that people can trace things they don't know are there by other means. " .
Water is one thing but previously unrecorded and unsuspected archaeology is a bit different ,any examples ?
I wasn't entirely clear there. My apologies. I was thinking of cases like the dowser who traced the water main in my earlier example, plus cases such as the one I obvserved in the grounds of Glastonbury Abbey, where someone who'd never dowsed before found and followed a line of earth energy (whatever that is. I've traced it many times but we just have a name for it, not an explanation) which took a meandering course and then entered part of the buildings through a wall near a doorway at an odd angle. I kept well back so as not to influence the young lady who did this.

I've never dowsed archeological remains, which would be very interesting, especially in the case of unknown remains that were subsequently detected. The story in the next person's post to th one quoted is interesting, in which traces were found by dowsing than nothing was there. Such awkward failures need thorough investigation as well as the successes, I think, first to rule out sheer chance with the successes, and second to investigate whether something else was being detected and the fault was with the interpretations of the dowsers and not with the dowsing itself. We're really at a very basic level with investigating this stuff.

Water seems to be have been a common "find " throughout dowsing historically and everything else far more anectdotal , the repeat of experices is interesting , do you think there might be a an association with water with these ?
The investigative route is the only way that we will get any understanding .
Ever tried dowsing over a big bridge like the Humber bridge , in an aeroplane , over landfill etc
I began by dowsing `earth energies' (despite my water company experience, and that's been my main focus. I really need to learn to dowse different things and differentiate much more clearly.

I'm pretty sure the `earth energies' aren't underground water, although Guy Underwood attributed his findings to `blind springs.' I've dowsed some of Underwood's locations (and I'm amazed by his skill when I compare his mappings with what I found), but most of the things I've found don't seem to relate to water. That said, my water knowledge relates more to piped water supplies than to natural water flows. I realise as soon as I consider this how little I know. I only know something works, which is a mere starting point.

R Resonox
Resonox May 20, 2012 07:08:44
Replying to Sweep

Sweep wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Sweep wrote:
tiompan wrote:
Sensible post Sweep I only slightly disagree on one point /suggestion .
"Nor is there any doubt that people can trace things they don't know are there by other means. " .
Water is one thing but previously unrecorded and unsuspected archaeology is a bit different ,any examples ?
I wasn't entirely clear there. My apologies. I was thinking of cases like the dowser who traced the water main in my earlier example, plus cases such as the one I obvserved in the grounds of Glastonbury Abbey, where someone who'd never dowsed before found and followed a line of earth energy (whatever that is. I've traced it many times but we just have a name for it, not an explanation) which took a meandering course and then entered part of the buildings through a wall near a doorway at an odd angle. I kept well back so as not to influence the young lady who did this.

I've never dowsed archeological remains, which would be very interesting, especially in the case of unknown remains that were subsequently detected. The story in the next person's post to th one quoted is interesting, in which traces were found by dowsing than nothing was there. Such awkward failures need thorough investigation as well as the successes, I think, first to rule out sheer chance with the successes, and second to investigate whether something else was being detected and the fault was with the interpretations of the dowsers and not with the dowsing itself. We're really at a very basic level with investigating this stuff.

Water seems to be have been a common "find " throughout dowsing historically and everything else far more anectdotal , the repeat of experices is interesting , do you think there might be a an association with water with these ?
The investigative route is the only way that we will get any understanding .
Ever tried dowsing over a big bridge like the Humber bridge , in an aeroplane , over landfill etc
I began by dowsing `earth energies' (despite my water company experience, and that's been my main focus. I really need to learn to dowse different things and differentiate much more clearly.

I'm pretty sure the `earth energies' aren't underground water, although Guy Underwood attributed his findings to `blind springs.' I've dowsed some of Underwood's locations (and I'm amazed by his skill when I compare his mappings with what I found), but most of the things I've found don't seem to relate to water. That said, my water knowledge relates more to piped water supplies than to natural water flows. I realise as soon as I consider this how little I know. I only know something works, which is a mere starting point.

So essentially...you are saying apart from water , nothing has been actually found?....Earth energies has a prosaic ring to it...but still boils down to rods moving and no explanation (as human error is never taken into account) given as to why, so a fancy name has been attributed to what is at the end of the day "nothing there". Most of what you've found doesn't relate to water...what have you found (if it is artefacts and you'd rather not say for fear of villification..fair enough) you still haven't really said, apart from this hint at an unprovable energy....unless rods moving unaccountably is considered irrefutable proof of something. If a deeply religious person (of whatever faith they might hold) were to tell you that this is merely a manifestation of God's Power...can you imagine the scorn they'd get from every quarter...even the church of their choosing.