Another article by Dan Wilson, who we have met in recent posts. In this short article

“The Pure Source or the secret of apple-cheeked little old ladies”, in

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No269_2000_p16.pdf

He discusses the difficulty of errors in dowsing in a rather light-hearted fashion. He thinks that perhaps we can never get to the bottom of what causes problems in dowsing. He suggests that analysing why failure occurs, might actually prevent finding a solution. The psychology is too complex, and anyway, as he points out, we don’t really know anything about the nature of reality.

He reflects on a certain class of lady dowser and members of the British Society of Dowsers, whom he encountered when he joined the organisation in the 1970s. He recalls that their dowsing was never affected by talk or expectation of failure, which would have undermined their confidence. Consequently, he claims, they were always successful. He contrasts them with another class of member, mainly male, who were also successful, but only because they “walled off” areas which they knew from experience, did not work for them.

With these observations in mind, he suggests that to improve dowsing, one must give oneself permission to be “fallible, but in ways, which will not affect the accuracy of the dowsing response to our very next question.” And follow the way of the ACLOLs.

In the recent history of the British Society of Dowsers, one of its more philosophical members was Dan Wilson. A very accomplished dowser specialising in the medical side of the art, he often wrote short articles, or simply letters challenging the accepted orthodoxy. 

In this letter, he is inspired to write to the Society following the Beadon cube controversy, the subject of the last blog post.

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No211_1986_p235.pdf

He mentions his review of previous articles in the BSD journal, during which we found an instance of another device, which like the Beadon cube, supposedly removed the ability to dowse. This was in an article by A. D. Manning, who for 20 years had used a rather elaborate looking device, constructed from copper coils (figure supplied), to protect some 2000 properties from “harmful rays”.

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No126_1964_p196.pdf

In the article, Mr Manning provides some examples of his practice and results. He was familiar with the work of Von Pohl, who was mentioned in the post of 06-05-2020. He ends by saying that harmful effects not only from underground steams but other influences. The effect is usually very narrow. (Contrast this with the finding of Dr Bailey, who says otherwise).

Enter Robert Leftwich, who was an extremely able dowser. It seems that he challenged another dowser, who also used a device akin to Manning’s to remove the ability to “neutralise” a stream, to perform his work; Leftwich, would then try and locate the same stream. This he did very easily, in addition, finding the stream’s rate of low, depth, and breadth.

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No131_1966_p211.pdf

In his article, Leftwich asserts that the neutralisation of harmful streams, or rays, is purely a mental faculty.

In his article, Dan Wilson highlighted how extraordinary this observation by Leftwich actually was. It is clear that Wilson was no fan of the idea of “rays”. But what was happening? His idea was to dowse the answer. Through his “concept dowsing”, he tried to dowse, through a process of iteration, for a system of language, or vocabulary, that might allow him to better understand things. But at the same time, he realised that the results of such an exercise could not be trusted as facts, but only as “clues”.

He derives four principal reason for why dowsers get the wrong answers. To be honest, these are difficult to decipher from his writings. In attempting to understand, the nuances are very likely to be missed. Here is my attempt:

1. Our understanding of how things are, affects our interpretation of dowsing results.

2. He introduces “perceptual consciousness”. This seems to be a group consciousness, of which the dowser’s own consciousness is a part, and it may, or may not be matched to the task in hand. He suggests (and elaborates on this in other writings) that situations have very long histories and the perceptual consciousness cannot always comprehend the extent of this history. For many quests, it is sufficient to be in touch with only the most recent part of that history.

3. He suggests that there are subconscious concepts (he terms them SLWOTs) which are used to interpret reality.  These reside in the group perceptual consciousness.  They can arise from various sources, for instance from our collective human experience, or some may be added by individuals. He has the idea of a “perceiving intelligence”, which is a group effect of each individual’s intelligence, and works to select out the concepts applicable to a given quest, which may be helpful or unhelpful.  Though he suggests that there are ways to abandon unhelpful ones.

4.The cultural framework of the dowsers can limit what questions they can pose. This can lead to them working with too many unhelpful concepts and gives rise to incorrect results.

Returning to the Beadon cube. There is the shared subconscious concept that the cube will remove the ability to dowse, but one group held another concept that the no-dowsing effect is not cleared using the cube.

Perhaps his thinking is best summed up (with the risk of over simplifying), by his statement that the whole affair was “… a case of unwitting self-hypnosis with the aid of subconsciously transferred belief patterns.” For which he recommends that “[one] stand aside for a moment and do your own thing.” Here he seems to side with Leftwich, suggesting that for a purely mental processes, no devices are necessary.

This brings us back to the post of 31-3-2020, and Dan Wilson’s letter, which is broadly saying that what concepts we think about, we can choose to make a reality.

In the mid-1980s, a controversy suddenly arose within the British Society of Dowsers. It had to do with Earth Energies and a new invention intended to aid their removal. Earth energies were becoming an increasingly important part of members’ interests. It might seem rather ludicrous to non-dowsers, how so much angst could be caused by something so seemingly trivial, but it illustrates how seriously some dowsers take such matters. In the end, the matter was rather cleverly side stepped by the Society, by referring the subject to the “sound” judgement of its scientific advisor, the same Dr Bailey mentioned in the post of 13-06-2020 on radionics. What he has to say on the matter is perhaps the most interesting part of the affair. However, I include all the published correspondence including Dr Bailey’s “report”, as it appeared in the following BSD Journal article, “De-raying devices. Report from the Editor”

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No210_1985_p151.pdf

A picture of the device is here:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/Beadon_cube.jpg

The story began with two well-known dowsers of the time, who belonged to the “Worthing dowsers”, Geoffrey King and Wing Commander Clive V. Beadon. (There are a number of small dowsing groups within the UK, some of whom are affiliated with the British Society of Dowsers.) These two individuals had been working some time on a device to remove harmful Earth energies. The device, which became known as the “Beadon cube”, was constructed from Perspex, moulded from liquid methyl methacrylate, into which had been carefully placed a spiral of copper wire. (Later the device would include selected gemstones and become an octahedron.) The claim was that, if placed on a map, then one was unable to dowse within the area covered by the spiral, that is, find any of the things you would normally be able to dowse for, eg water or pipes. Apparently, it removed the dowsing “influence” of such things, rather than acting on the dowser themselves.

There was a good deal of excitement about this innovation, some considered it a “quantum leap” forward. However, there were others amongst the Worthing dowsers, who were concerned that the device might also have harmful effects. Rather than investigate themselves, and cause a potential split between the membership, they appealed to the BSD to setup a committee to test this device.

The BSD council was rather reluctant to do an investigation, because they felt the results would not be unequivocal. In an effort at compromise, they asked Dr Bailey to give his opinion. His repsonse begins on page 162.

Bailey acknowledged that although there is a lot of evidence for non-physical Earth energies, this was mainly derived through dowsing, and that “dowsing results only are no evidence at all”. However, his own experience was that “people and animals ARE influenced by things that are not scientifically measurable” [his capitals].  But the whole field was difficult to understand. In fact, he asserts that “it is the EXPLANATIONS that cause the problems” [his capitals]. He acknowledged that there are no radiations that can account for dowsing. All the terms for Earth energies were just “mind constructs”, and the dowsers using these terms often had no exact idea what is meant by these ideas. What was needed was some objective criteria, using dowsing first to find an influence, followed by an examination into whether people were being harmed or actually benefitting from the “energies”. He pointed to the instance of such practice in article by David Steven, in the posting: 16-06-2020 – Clearing energy lines.  

In his report, Bailey therefore stuck to the observed facts, as he understood them. These were in summary:

1/ People can be affected by the environment in which they live.

2/ It is possible to improve this environment. Devices appear to work, only because the operator is present and believes in them.

3/ The improvement is not auto-suggestion.

4/ It is possible to be influenced by the thoughts of another. So, it is no surprise if many people get the same results.

5/ One’s own beliefs and motivations affect one’s dowsing results. (A humble approach was best).

He concluded with the assertion, that it is the practitioner rather than the methods that is important, and he looks upon so called de-raying devices as merely “props”. What is more fundamental is the integrity of intention of the person investigating the problem.

One application that seems particular to dowsing, is that of removing Earth energies, which are perceived to be detrimental to health. We have met these in earlier posts for example post: 06-05-2020 – Earth energies view from Europe. They are variously referred to as ‘black streams’, or “geopathic stress”, or some time even “ley lines”. They are considered to be responsible for a range of health conditions. A description is provided by the author of this BSD article, “Dowsing for the cause of certain illnesses”, by Herbert Douglas

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No204_1984_p256.pdf

Douglas has dowsed the bed rooms of a significant number of people, who had either cancer or arthritis. In all cases he finds underground streams crossing under the beds of the sufferers. The article has several photos of beds showing this phenomenon.

Many dowsers spend a lot of their time and effort making suitable interventions to block, divert or remove these energies. In the past, such an intervention was often referred to as de-raying, reflecting the idea that these energies were indeed energetic rays.  

In this article, published in 1985, in the Journal of the British Society of Dowsers, the author Michael Guest, who became an honorary life-president of the society, reviews the field at that time, in “Through Dowser’s eyes. A survey of deraying techniques”

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No209_1985_p111.pdf

In his article, Guest points out that for a long time, he was puzzled about the apparent dual natures of dowsing – physical and psychic. He finally rationalised the situation by viewing these explanations as being “twin aspects of an underlying unity”. He then proceeds through the various methods dowsers use across the spectrum, from physical to purely mental. At the physical end, dowsers use “devices” of various kinds, then there are physical actions, through to a simple action of intent to intervene, (even just using a map). It would appear that all these interventions are indeed unified through the act of intention. This is the simplest explanation; the use of devices is simply part of a ritual, a physical representation of the intent. The dowser believes that it is the device that is making an active intervention, or possibly it helps overcome any unconscious inhibitions. 

But what of the noxious energy lines themselves? There is a frequent attribution to underground water. Other dowsers mention geological rock faults, “ley lines” and Herbert Douglas even mentions lightning strikes.

The most common assertion though is an association with water, and this must be because the dowser is obtaining a reaction for water. However, there is very little written that shows any independent confirmation of this link, for example, no drilling to confirm the existence of the streams. There is perhaps a possibility that the cause of the reaction is somehow mis-identified. However, some accounts do exist that collaborate the link indecently of the dowser’s reaction. A particularly interesting one, is referred to (not in the article)

“Dowsing on a Scottish farm”, by David Steven :

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No178_1977_p86.pdf

In this he refers to an exceptional dowse, Mrs Smithett, who through map dowsing discovered black streams and good streams. An intriguing point was that there existed wells on both these stream types, seemingly conforming the link between actual water and black streams. “[T]here were wells along the black lines, but according to local tradition these were bad wells, and nobody drank water from them. One well was fenced off as being harmful to animals”. But the wells on the good lines were OK, “people go to them in preference to using water from the main.”

In his article, Guest refers to instances where streams have been diverted. And there are many accounts in the BSD journal of similar results, lending credibility to the idea. But as we have seen, some dowsers show considerable PK ability, so it is not beyond possibility that they could possibly influence the course of underground streams.

However, there may be other explanations than purely physical ones. Based on observations such as those of Douglas above, that lines so often pass under a “victim’s” chair or bed, Guest speculates as to “whether the lines create the illness, or the illness creates the lines”. It’s a good question.

Dowsing seems uniquely suited to field survey work in archaeology. Here is a short article, authored by Dr R.H.G. Whaley, describing dowsing work under taken for on behalf of the North-East Hampshire Archaeological Society. In it he addresses the problem of “false positives” in dowsing indications, and is a rare instance of “signal processing” applied to dowsing.

The aim was to test dowsing on a known site. The problem was to locate the positions of the two sides of a moat, which had long been filled in. The approximate positions of the moat’s edges had already been predetermined using a resistivity survey.   

The idea was to split the dowsers into two groups. One dowsed along a line directly over the moat, encompassing both edges of the moat. The second group dowsed a nearby area, which did not include moat. By having a number of dowsers in each group, it was possible to achieve some signal averaging over the members. Then by comparing the average dowsing reactions obtained between the two groups, statistically very significant results were obtained in the areas near the edges of the moat.

It was a simple, yet apparently powerful method. Although not suggested in the article, one might assume that the same method might be used in map dowsing work of a similar nature, with the further savings of time and energy that would bring.

The article, “Dowsing fashioned into archaeological tool”, is found here:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No242_1993_p372.pdf

The article is taken from the book “Dowsing for Health. The Applications & Methods For Holistic Healing”, by Arthur Bailey, published by Quantum in 1990.

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/Bailey_Dowsing_for_Health_chap11.pdf

Dr Bailey, a lecturer in Electronics at Bradford University, was scientific advisor and President of the British Society of Dowsers. His dowsing interest tended towards health-related matters. In his book he devoted a chapter to “Distant Healing”, in which he describes the practice of radionics. The original concept of radionics was devised by a Dr Abrams, in the early part of the last century, and was subsequently developed by others. It is the art of medical diagnosis and treatment using a rather sophisticated looking device. It will at least have several numbered dials on it, a sample holder and perhaps an aerial. But otherwise it is totally impractical, in the sense that the box has no functioning parts. To use it, some type of sample is taken from the patient and usually placed on the box. The operator, turns the dials,  and dowses for a number that represents a particular symptom. The dowsing can take several forms. In the original device, the operator strokes a rubber pad and the dowsing reaction is a feeling that their finger is sticking to the pad, but in later practice, the operator might use a pendulum. The process can be done in reverse to find a treatment number, which is then “broadcast”, or directed toward the patient, to promote healing.

Bailey’s article is particularly clear illustration of the technique. He builds his own box, which he then uses successfully, but he can offer no explanation of why it should work. Therefore, he is aware that it is merely a prop, and that it is the mind of operator that is performing the diagnosis and treatment. In fact, as he points out, the box can be removed completely.

What is particularly interesting is that the diagnosis/treatment can be reduced to a number, irrespective of the complexity. This is rather like dowser obtaining a distinct number of pendulum oscillations over a given object. As we have seen in earlier posts, dowsing reactions are often particular (and consistent) to a given dowser and so is the case in radionics, with operators often disagreeing over what number, or rate, corresponds to what. 

The Bailey article ends with him explaining how anyone might begin the practice of healing, using only a pendulum.

Another interesting point which he touches on, is that the technique can also be used for harm as well as good. He mentions the use of the radionics box for pest control. I am not sure of the source of this story, but I have seen it quoted in another book by a British’s dowser book. An organic farmer was plagued with caterpillars, and unable to use chemicals, requested the help of a radionics practitioner, who it seems, successfully killed them all.

Finally, it may be of interest to read about the initial development of radionics by Dr Abrams.  The following article chronicles his work and ideas and was published in the Journal of the British Society of Dowsers. A wealthy eccentric individual, it seems that Abrams began with the observation that he could diagnose problems by gently tapping on the abdomen wall of the patient. (There was something rather unusual about this, because the sound changed depending on the orientation of the patient with respect to the Earth’s magnetic field).

It seems that Abrams was infused with the idea that all diseases emitted some form of radiation. He held the hypothesis that diseased cells radiated in some way, and that the nerves of the patient were affected by this radiation, which caused their muscles to contract, and this caused the sound changes, detected by his percussion technique. He then progressed to placing tumour samples in close proximity to healthy individual to see what effect that had.  Next he connected the samples to the subjects by long wires. Then convinced he was dealing with electromagnetic radiation, he introduced an electric circuit, comprising a series of rheostats (variable resistances). So now he could obtain a kind of “reading” for the illness, by altering the values of the rheostats. Finally, he discovered that he could use a sample, eg a spot of blood, in place of the patient.

Reading the article, it seems clear that there is no “physical” mechanism in Abrams work, except perhaps for his percussion technique, though this too, like his healing, was likely a manifestation of his mental intent.

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No38_1942_p156

This article was written by a former president of the British Society of Dowsers (BSD), named Major-General J. Scott-Elliott. It is a transcript of a talk he gave to members of the society in 1966. At that time there was a good deal of debate about the cause of the dowsing reaction, did it have a physical cause, or was in a purely mental activity? Since then, I believe that the latter is the more widely accepted view amongst dowsers, but there are still those who believe it has a physical cause, or even a hybrid effect. Outside of the dowsing fraternity, most would attribute it to something physical.

His article is found here:

http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/ BSD_No133_1966_p288.pdf

In this article Scott-Elliott, gives examples of a few of the many possible applications of dowsing, in an attempt to unpick the physical from the psychic. He considered dowsing to be the art of searching based on some question, so he arbitrarily refers to the dowsing reaction as the ‘Q force’. He asserts that this Q force acts through the dowser and that the dowsing device is simply an indicator. I believe that most dowsers would agree with that.

His examples cover the three broad types of dowsing practice: dowsing close to what is sought, for example medical dowsing, and working with plants; dowsing from a distance (in either space and/or time), archaeological dowsing, including dating, depthing of water; and map dowsing, where he dowsed the movements of a ship.  To Scott-Elliott, however, there is no differentiation between these practices, “all dowsing is one”.

He concludes that dowsing is “part physical and part mental”, but it’s not clear quite what he means by this. In some instances, for example in healing, something physical might be transferred something physical. Then there is the interesting effect of clay of the estimation of water depth.  But as he asks, “is this fact or inhibition?”. Many dowsers have commented that it causes them problems depthing, so there is clearly an effect, but with all dowsing, the dowsing is bringing unconscious biases to the process. How influential are these. There are examples in the BSD journal of dowsers who are untroubled by clay. Take for instance this statement from BSD journal issue no129, page 62,

“The practising dowsers present also expressed the views on the real or spurious effects of clays upon their depthing readings, and here it seems that the mental school had an advantage over the physical school of dowser, the former experiencing no distortion, at all of course, by strata content.”

We perhaps have a bias for physical effects, but the simplest explanation for the dowsing effect is that it is purely psychic. In fact, it seems very difficult, if not impossible, to differentiate information glean by psychic means, from that derived from physical source. However, consider this. A buried object might give rise to weak magnetic field at ground level. If we postulate the existence of a magnetic field detector, we might explain the dowsing reaction when in the vicinity of the object. But how do we explain any additional information we might obtain, through dowsing, about the object? We would need to explain how information about the object is actually encoded in the magnetic field. The scientist and dowser, Zaboj Harvalik (see dowsing-research.net for some of his papers) did substantial work on the ability of dowsers to detect weak magnetic fields. He concluded that professional dowsers can detect changes in magnetic field of less than one millionth the strength of the Earth’s field. How can these people possibly function in the World? This seems more understandable if the sensing of the field is through a psychic filter. And finally there is the problem of explaining map dowsing …