With the year ending and a time to look back, I thought it might be interesting to remember the life of Evelyn Penrose, now deceased, but who I think it is fair to say, was one of the greatest dowsers of the 20th century. The account that follows is a the first of a two-part account of her exploits (both published in the BSD journals in 2020), which are based on her fascinating autobiography.
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No335_2020_p9.pdf
Here is a reprint from the Quarterly Transactions of the British College of Psychic Science. Entitled “Water divining at a distance”.
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No22_1938_p285.pdf
It is based on a letter from Mr Frank Hives (F.H.), a member of the college. His cousin, Mr Chas V. Hives (C.V.H.) had a property in Australia. The property had an existing well, but he wanted to improve it by sinking a new borehole. To ensure that this borehole provided water, he decided to enlist the psychic abilities of F.H. and sent him a rough sketch plan. Note that F.H. had never visited the location, and that throughout, it appears that he was living in Africa.
F.H. divined using a crystal. Upon making his mind blank, the crystal turned “cloudy”, then two numbers appeared, 250 followed by 585. The latter remained until he removed the crystal from the plan, only to reappear when he replaced it on the plan.
It seems he also divined using copper wires in some manner, not well described. But these wires usually behaved by “going down” over water, and “rose up” over mineral deposits (“usually iron”). When he passed the wired over the chosen position of the new borehole, the wires rose up, and he saw 250 in the crystal, but the number changed to 585, when the wires went down.
Later, as he moved the wires over the plan, they “vibrated” over a spot very near to the borehole, but under a nearby road. F.H. considered that this was the place where the bore should have been sunk, to a depth of 383 feet.
Later with the crystal in the plan, he observed “a thin blue line, increasing in width as it continued, as if drawn by an invisible hand, started from a place on the plan, a few yards below the spot where the figures 385 had appeared under the road] and continued right off the plan, passing the present site of the well by about 20 yards…”. He concluded that the well was not on the underground stream.
The position of the new borehole was suggested by a driller. He appears to have divined the spot, and predicted that water would be found at 180 feet, although he had advised that a better site would have been under the road as per F.H.. A description of the layers encountered during drilling, showed a lot of clay, but basalt at 180 feet and no water, which then gave way to “dolorite” [sic] at 250 feet, “a very hard igneous rock”, that can contain iron compounds. The description does not say whether water was eventually found in the borehole, perhaps at 585feet, but the intention was to stop drilling at 500 feet, and so we might infer that it was a failure.
Focussing only on the bore-hole, C.V.H. ignored F.H.’s advice about the underground stream, until after an accidental conversation, discovered that two water diviners working for a previous owner of the property, had located a stream in “much the same direction” as F.H. The article does not confirm whether the stream actually existed, but does show F.H.’s remarkable remote abilities to replicate the findings of three diviners.
At the time this article was written, remote dowsing was still largely considered to be a rare ability for a dowser. Of course, it is extraordinary, but dowsers now consider it to be an ability accessible to most, with practice. The use of a crystal, and the visualisation of depth information, is I believe, unique in the BSD accounts. While visualising the course of the stream, might share some parallels with reports of several individuals, who could “see” underground water, while walking over land. But still, F.H. truly had exceptional abilities.
Over the year, the dowsing-research site has been slowly expanded. Digitised versions of the journal of the British Society of Dowsers are now being added, beginning with the first edition published on 1933. Over the years, the journals have contained transcripts of talks given to the Society by its members and invited guests. I thought it would be an interesting exercise to resurrect a selection of these talks, and breath life back into them, by using modern technology to convert the text into the spoken word. The process is reasonably time consuming, so some patience is required. However, the resulting videos will be added to the new “Talks” section of the site. Hopefully you will agree with me that the results are reasonably acceptable and where possible I will provide a link back to the original transcript.
Some of the most interesting writing to appear in the BSD journals are often the letters. Letters can be of complaint, praise, desires, but many of these simply relate the curious experiences of dowsers. Here are two such letters.
The first, entitled “Ghosts”, is a letter from Michael Jack:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No266_1999_p377.pdf
He begins with the observation that he can use dowsing to communicate with his dead wife. She helpfully provides the necessary settings for his washing machine!
He then describes using his dowsing skills to find the identity of a “ghost” he encountered. Amongst the BSD articles there is very little of this nature that has been written, so it is particularly interesting.
Next is a letter from Gillian Collins:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No240_1993_p281.pdf
This describes an example of dowsing by proxy. The author’s unconscious appears to have connected with that of her friend, such that the author’s dowsing responded to her friend’s requests. Maybe the author consciously allowed this to happen, but it makes me wonder whether some of the reported dowsing results, might arise from conscious, or unconscious ideas or wishes, espoused by others; maybe akin to the idea of a “meme”?
Here is a nice tail of a very practical use of dowsing, that of car maintenance. In
“Australian Experiences”, by Alex Deans:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No255_1997_p208.pdf
The article speaks for itself, but it shows just how useful and accurate dowsing can be.
There are a couple of other points of interest for those not familiar with dowsing. He uses graphical aids to obtain (in this case) numerical readings, which he says people are “amazed” by the correspondence between readings obtained this way compared with those taken using standard measuring equipment. Also, he uses a pendulum, which typically gave him a binary yes/no response, by gyrating in either an anti-clockwise, or clockwise manner respectively. It might be thought that this was the limit of its use. However, the motion could be nuanced, with any oval motion indicating some uncertainly.
Here is an account by a self-styled “veteran dowser”, of 44 years, of his experiences as a dowser in South Africa before WW2.
“Water and mineral divining experiences in South Africa “, by Mr J. J. Morton.
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No20_1938_p159.pdf
In his article, he simply narrates some of his experiences, working mainly as a water diviner. It is typical of many down to Earth accounts submitted to the BSD journal in the earlier years of the society’s existence, often by members working in many countries across the World, often dowsing in very tough environment. The society acted as a means of linking these people together, to exchange information. They illustrate how important dowsers were in past days and how practical the activity of dowsing was back then; in contrast one feels to the more spiritual direction it has gone in more recent times.
Mr Morton seems to have been another dowser of remarkable sensitivity, for he describes how he could sense water up to ten miles away. The reaction of his Y shaped dowsing rod seems to have been considerable, which makes one wonder whether some form of psychokinesis was at work here.
He was intrigued by the harmful effects attributed to subterranean water flows. He remarks how trees appeared to be weakened when growing over such flows. And indeed, his own is sensitivity to water, seemed to have a deleterious effect on him, if exposed for some time.
For much of the BSD’s existence, the effect of underground water flows on health, has been of considerable interest to many dowsers. Maybe this effect is real and is mediated by one’s sensitivity to water? But something that has puzzled me often, is that the claims that underground water is causing some ailment, is never substantiated by actually drilling down to the supposed flow. And rather interesting, Mr Morton observed that in his experience, mineral deposits could be interpreted by many dowsers as underground streams, though he himself had a certain “gift” to differentiate between the two. It just makes me wonder.
Here is the content of a talk entitled “Dowsing is not just for water”.
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No237_1992_p113.pdf
It was given by Chris Hinsley, to the BSD annual conference of 1991. It’s a nice illustration of applying dowsing to three unusual ‘practical’ problems. Namely:
The interest in the article is not so much about whether the dowsing results were right or wrong. In fact, feedback was only obtained for the first application, and in that case the dowsing failed. Rather, it is how the dowser goes about the task, the steps involved, the questions asked and his analysis of why his dowsing failed.
He says, “The better the understanding of the request the better and more accurate the dowsing results” and stresses the need to establish a clear mental witness. This was easier for the second task, then the first.
When the subject of the quest cannot be easily visualised, a physical witness might suffice.
It seems necessary to know just enough to, but to be careful of preconceived ideas.
Repeating the dowsing question with the same subject, to get better “odds”, and therefore a more reliable result, seems not to work for dowsing.
Map dowsing can be a helpful first step if the search area is large, but site dowsing is necessary for precision.
As a diversion from the BSD journals, I wanted to draw attention to the following addition to the ‘Books’ section of the website: www.dowsing-research.net
It is Jacobs rod : A translation from the French of a rare and curious work, AD 1693, on the art of finding springs, mines and minerals by means of the hazel rod. Translation by T. Welton 1874. The author was a French dowser named Jean Nicolas. This has been added to the books section of the site.
The translation comprises two sections: the translation followed by additional material added by the translator. Only the translation is included here.
It is surprising to read that many of the dowsing methods mentioned in the early BSD journals were in use more than two hundred years earlier. For instance, he mentions the use of the Y rod in preference to the first dowsing rods, which seemed to be simply sticks, the Y rod having better movement possibilities. He also describes the use of samples, These might be attached to the end of the Y rod, or perhaps the rod was touched against an example of whatever was sought.
He mentions some applications of dowsing, other than simply water divning. For instance, searching for stolen goods, settling boundary disputes. His main areas of interest appear to be minerals, ie seeking mines, underground streams. But the rod could also be used for retrieving stolen goods and the perpetrators or settling boundary disputes. But
One particularly interesting point in the text, is that he seems to be the first to write about “the Bishop’s rule” for depthing water (page 41) (this has often been erroneously ascribed to the bishop of Grenoble and the French dowser Bleton, in 1770).
Finally, regarding explanations for the dowsing effect, he afirms that these are of a physical nature, but then in his day, suggesting that it was due to the “emanation of subtle bodies”. But the alternative was to suppose it was some supernatural work, perhaps of the Devil!
In this article (extracted from a longer one) from the early journals of the BSD, a member, Dr J. A. Simpson Emslie, applies his medical expertise to assert that dowsing reactions are purely a result of reflex actions.
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No10_1935_p106.pdf
He says that normally the brain controls these, but during dowsing, this control is relaxed, permitting the dowser’s experience. He goes on to make the claim, but it is not clear how this is substantiated, that he knew two dowsers who had suffered damage to those nerves that control reflex actions. The resulting loss of control meant that their dowsing reactions were very much more exaggerated.
He points out that a dowsing reaction can be obtained with one’s tongue, “…if it held midway between the roof and the floor of the mouth. You will find that the reaction will make it rise towards the palate.” What me might refer to as “Oral dowsing”, was the subject of a very interesting study into the dowsing effect, undertaken at Guy’s Hospital, London, by a Dr Lintott. It was entitled “Some observations on so-called water divining” and published in Guy’s hospital gazette, June 24; 1933. A summary of the work was published in the first BSD journal: No1 p9-10
The study involved recording the changing tension in the jaw muscle of the subjects as they traversed a water pipe. This was achieved by having the subject hold a rubber bulb in their mouth! Interestingly, “all the experiments were carried out in a strong spirit of scepticism and under critical observation, and, where possible, control experiments were made.”
It was found that the subjects fell into three groups: 1) those who were completely insensitive; 2) those for who had some sensitivity, but this could vary over time; 3) those with constant and marked sensitivity. In addition, they noticed how the subjects’ attention was important, suggesting “some action of the higher cerebral centres” which prevented them from “tuning in”.
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No1_1933_p109.pdf
In conclusion, many dowsers would most likely agree with the Doctor and a lot of evidence seems to support this. However there are some documented instances of what appears to be psychokinetic influences at work. This will be the subject of a future post.
In this article the author, wants to make the point that the diviner is not passive, but an active agent. He appears to be self-taught dowser, with a “natural” dowsing ability, or sensitivity which extended to the ability to “feel” the presence of what he searched for. He was seeking a theory to account for his experiences, but that alluded him. However, some of his personal observations are of interest. For instance, he was able to feel “belts” of influence adjacent to underground streams. This I take to mean that he could feel the presence of the so-called “parallels” running next to streams. He could also “feel” underground water down to 2000 feet. He primary observation was that he could direct his attention to whatever he sought thereby filtering out all other influences. This he was able to distinguish between multiple streams which might lie under each other. Using his directed consciousness, he seems to be one of the first dowsers to have developed a countdown method of depthing underground streams. A method quite common today. Practice and familiarity with environment he was working in seemed to be both important.
“A water divining theory” by Rev. H. W. Lea-Wilson:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No10_1935_p119.pdf
Here is an article entitled. “The point depth method” by Elvan:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No9_1935_p86.pdf
In the earlier years of BSD, members were often keen to improve the practices using in dowsing. Once such invention was “the point depth method” devised in 1936, by Major R. Creyke, (a.k.a. Elvan), who has been described as “an extremely painstaking and reliable English amateur dowser”. This was a new and simple method to find the depth of underground streams through dowsing.
It appears that the method was at least inspired by an earlier method devised by the French dowse M. Probst. This fellow seems to have been motivated by the idea that underground water emitted some form of electromagnetic radiation and he called his device the “radio-capteur”. It comprised a simple metal spike, rounded at one end, and pointed at the other, which was then stuck into the earth. The curved tip which remained protruding above the ground, was placed between the poles of a horseshoe magnet mounted inside a box. A wire was then attached to the box and, isolated from the earth by a series of stakes topped with porcelain fixtures, extended in a straight line away from the spike.
To quote from the book “Divining” by Christopher Bird, (M&J publishing Group, London 1980 ), “Probst considered that ‘waves’ emitted from an underground water source or metal ore deposit were in some way “captured” by the spike and, assisted by the magnetic field, propelled along the wire. A dowser would then straddle the wire and frog-walk along it until he got a reaction. The length of that portion of the wire from the ring to the spot between his feet was supposedly equivalent to the depth of the water vein or any other object being sought. Deeper water veins would be ascertainable further along the wire.”
Probst’s approach however was quite unwieldly and Creyke’s method was much simpler to use. He retained some elements of the original idea. He used a thin Mumetal rod (Mu-metal is a nickel-iron soft ferromagnetic alloy), and a wire connected to this rod, but now with no insulation between wire and ground. The road was inserted in the ground, immediately over an underground stream. The dowser then simply walked along the direction of the wire with their back to the spike, until they obtained reactions with their chosen dowsing device. The distance at which these reactions occurred, measured from the rod gave the depth of features relating to the stream. In his original account, he makes no reference to e.m. radiation, but he asserts that Mumetal gave a better dowsing response than a copper rod.
However, at a later time, the self-appointed scientist to the BSD, Cecil Maby, in his book “Physics of the Divining rod” (Bell & Sons Ltd. London, 1939), concluded that all kinds of metal rod gave satisfactory results. For instance, he had successfully employed the method with iron, steel, brass, copper and zinc rods. He also made the observation that then longer the ‘point’ rod, the stronger the depth reactions. The difference between the experience of Creyke and Maby is interesting. It may suggest that unconsciously, or otherwise, Creyke considered the dowsing effect dependent on magnetism in some way. It was not uncommon at this time, or even today, for dowsing to be associated with magnetism in some manner.
Creyke cites several examples of actual depth estimates made in the field and how they related to the actual depth of water in the final bore hole, with quite remarkable accuracy. Some other interesting points are noted. While following his method to depth a stream, he was able to block out any reactions from nearby parallel streams, which one might consider would interfere with the process. This tuning in ability, seems to rule out any physical explanation as to the effect. Instead it rather appears that the dowser is mentally programming their reaction, although apparently on an unconscious level, to coincide with what they seek, The wire simply acts as a prop, or aid, to focus the mind on the distance to the object dowsed. The material of the wire, the magnetism is being irrelevant. In principle then, it seems no different from map dowsing, where the map is represents the reality of the area being searched.
However, the article contains a final interesting observation. It describes how he introduced his method to a seasoned water diviner, who himself had no reliable way to estimate the depth of underground streams accurately. Although not familiar with Creyke’s method, it worked for him unintentionally, which on the face of it, appears to contradict the idea of unconscious programming. But in this case, the old dowser was being watched by Creyke, and there is the possibility that the former was being influenced unconsciously by the latter. This has been shown to be possible. It is difficult to say. Futhermore one could speculate on more radical possibilities. Perhaps the idea of the point depth method, once conceived of by Creyke, (or for that matter of Probst), might itself be capable of directing unconsciously the dowsing actions of dowsers, who otherwise have no conscious knowledge of the idea. (Well it’s just a speculation).
This article was written at the time the forked Y-shaped rod was universally used in dowsing. Here the author lists some of the virtues or otherwise of this device, for instance noting that it is particularly valuable when dowsing in a car! But when dowsing for long periods of time, it seems the Y rod is tiring to use. Today L-rods have become the main device for field dowsing, but before their “discovery”, other methods were adopted. One such is introduced here as the “singe handed rod”.
Essentially this is a traditional walking stick with curved handle. The stick is held in a state of unstable equilibrium. When the dowsing reaction occurs, the stick rotates around its long axis, thereby providing two possible reactions, just as with a forked Y rod.
The author also describes briefly how he conducts his dowsing. To begin he often using a sample of the object sought, a method characteristic of this period.
He was obviously a dowser experienced in locating water and minerals and describes how he estimates the properties of what he seeks. For the flow rate of underground water, he asks whether the stream is the width of something familiar to him, eg the width of a finger or arm. And for coal seams he counts upwards in some unit of length, until a reaction occurs, yielding an estimate of the seam thickness.
For estimating the depth of water, he uses two methods. One is counting, imaging increasing depth, until a reaction occurs. For the other, he uses the “Bishop’s rule”, but with a difference. First, he finds centre of stream, then walks out to the “first parallel” reaction. (see blog post 03-04-2020). For most dowsers the distance between the two is a direct estimate of the stream depth, but for the author it represents only half the depth. This is a small but very interesting observation. In my reading of the BSD journals I have only encountered one other dowser who has reported this, Dr Arthur Bailey, writing 50 years later. But the implication of this exception to the rule, seems to be that the dowsing is not reacting to a something physical at the parallels, but to something else, more like an unconscious presumption about the significance of the parallel reaction.
This is just another example of how the dowsing reaction to what is sought can be “programmed”, by with respect to its meaning. This filtering may be attuned either consciously, or unconsciously, with the dowser being unaware they are influencing the results.
The article is: “The single-handed rod” by Hans Falkinger
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No7_1935_p13.pdf
This short article was written by an Australian dowser and describes a few dowsing practices he has observed in use there over his 30 years as a dowser. It seems that the L shaped dowsing rod, made by bending a length of wire through ninety degrees, seems to have been in common use there, although sometimes of unusual shape. It was common at that time to use samples while dowsing and the dowser might suspend a sample form the end of the rod, but as he points out, it does not matter where the sample is located. It is simply an aid to the unconscious mind. Interestingly he mentions the more common practice of asking a “direct question”. Thi is clearly a time of transition in dowsing practice.
He is inclined to think that the dowsing reaction has a physical basis but works through the unconscious and makes reference to William Barret’s conclusion in his book the Divining Rod. Note also that he describes the reaction lines that lie parallel to the course of the underground stream and he finds that the distance from the centre of the stream to the parallels is a direct estimate of the stream’s depth. (See the post on 22-09-2020).
He thinks that dowsing is a “latent” ability in most people and he himself only managed to get a dowsing reaction with the L rod only through practice. But then not in all cases, since he finds that he can never obtain a reaction with a Y shaped rod. Is this an example of a subconscious mental block perhaps?
The article is by H. Busby, entitled “Some dowsing methods”:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No8_1935_p13.pdf
Mr Benjamin Tompkins, a water diviner, gives an account of his 30 years of practice. In it, he tells us that he assisted Sir William Barrett who wrote one of the first in-depth studies of dowsing the results of which were published as “The Divining Rod”. In this book, there is a short biography of Tompkins, in which he is described as one of the successful professional English dowsers of the early 20th century. He came to dowsing purely by chance, having observed the work of another famous dowser named Mullins, and without any tuition, it seems that he had instant success. This led him to advertise his services and he received many engagements in most parts of the country, and as far afield as South Africa. His list of patrons is very long and impressive.
He appears to be firmly of the opinion that water radiates some signal, relating to its presence, which enters his body through his feet. Perhaps this was because he felt the dowsing effect like a “current” passing through his body. He must also have thought that this signal was electromagnetic in nature, since he asserts that insulation between the feet and ground stopped the dowsing action in him.
When attempting to locate the best position for a borehole, he utilised his observation that several underground water courses, each of which he “felt” with the movement of his rod, would converge on to a point, that he termed the “head of the spring”. Interestingly, he notes that when he stood at this spot, his (Y shaped) dowsing rod would continue to revolve in his hands (this is an effect noted by many dowsers in the literature). There must have been quite a force at play in the rod, since he seems to have a difficult time in preventing it from revolving. To me, this suggests the possibility of a psychokinetic effect on the rod.
He is a little vague on how he measures depth, it appears to rely on a feeling, rather than using any “rule”. Perhaps this is professional concealment? Regarding quantity, he seemed to estimate it by measuring the number and size of flows into the spring head.
Finally, he says that water diviners are born and not made, and asserts that his own family have better talent than most and indeed the effect on one of his sons seems truly overwhelming, suggesting a well-developed dowsing sensitivity.
His article is “The theory and practice of water divining by the divining rod”:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No4_1934_p77.pdf
This is a short, rather amusing account about the kind of practical dowsing that was common in the early journals of the BSD. (It contrasts sharply with the more “spiritual” accounts that one finds in more recent publications).
In the account, the author (a military man, many of the members of the early BSD were from the military) wanted to locate through dowsing, additional water supplies for the city of Aden in Yemen.
However, he was a self-confessed amateur, having dowsed for just one well in his own garden in England. But despite holding the rather singular theory, that the dowsing effect was aided by uric acid in the blood, and therefore believing that success would be enhanced by imbibing a considerable amount of whisky, he also held to the idea that: “The tyro who has induced self-confidence is more likely to succeed than he who is dubious of his abilities.”
Despite a struggle with the disbelief shown by his superiors, his amateur findings finally proved successful.
The article is “Dowsing in Arabia”, by Commander C. Craufurd
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No5_1934_p105.pdf
It has been several weeks since my last post, but I intend to return to regular posting.
To begin with, I will take as my subject several articles which were published ini the very earliest of the BSD journals, back in the 1930s.
At that time, several members of the British Society of Dowsers lived and worked abroad, or example the Indian sub-continent and Arica. They wrote of their experiences for the BSD journal. Some of these accounts were of the actions of local dowsers, which gives an interesting perspective on non-European dowsing methods.
Here is an account of a water divining practice in Nigeria, by a member of the Yoruba people. Of particular interest is that the dowser does not use any dowsing device, but was able to give position and depth of the underground water. . After this, the dowser was seen to “’re-collect’ himself”, which hints at a sort of trance like state, during the dowsing practice. We cannot be sure, but perhaps the dowser could “see” the subterranean water. There are other instances of such ability mentioned in the BSD journals.
The article, can be found here:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No2_1933_p35.pdf
In July 1993, the British society of dowsers celebrated the society’s diamond jubilee, international congress, in York. There were several guest speakers from around the globe. But one I think stands out. It was delivered by Michael Bentine. Older readers might recognise him as a British comedian, comic actor and founding member of the Goons. He was also keenly interested in paranormal, having psychic abilities himself, and knew many of the great psychics of the 20th century. Although this talk only makes passing reference to dowsing, apart from being amusing, it includes some wonderful vignettes, illustrating that some individuals at least, are able to transcend reality in in simply extraordinary ways.
His talk, entitled “From the ridiculous to the paranormal”, is here:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No241_1993_p305.pdf
Two very active and popular members of the British Society of Dowsers were, until recently, the late Christopher and Veronica Strong. Very much modern dowsers, they used dowsing to make most of the decisions in their daily lives. The autobiography of Christopher Strong was entitled “Autobiography of a sceptical dowser”, (Penworth Press, 2016), although on reading, it is hard to detect any scepticism.
He found that dowsing pre-defined, structured, lists of questions when tackling certain types of problem, could be a great time saver. I have included a short extract from his autobiography, so you can read about this practice in his own words. They held consultations for the public, at the College for Psychic Studies in London. People would visit them asking for help or information. Prior to the meeting, he would consult a pre-meeting checklist, which is included here. Also, in his book, he gives an example of the use of a list, by describing their use when buying and selling a house. http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/sceptical_dowser_strong_p61.pdf
Here is a short but interesting set of observations by a member of the BSD. While dowsing on board two different ships during separate cruises, he detected “harmful” Earth rays. These lines, approximately 45 degrees to the long axis of the ship, were in fixed positions, irrespective of whether the ship was sailing, or in port. The “frequency” of the lines onboard ship was about the same as the “Earth rays” he has dowsed on land. Needless to say, the dowser could make no sense of his observations.
Here he first notes his observations of the lines aboard ship, “Dowsing whilst on a cruise in the Mediterranean” by Peter Pengilly:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No241_1993_p330.pdf
In this article he includes further comments and a diagram of the ship. He also sets a challenge to readers to trace the energy one themselves and provides his own results in the following edition, “Dowsing aboard ship” by Peter Pengilly:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No244_1994_p56.pdf
His results:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No245_1994_p119.pdf
Although only one dowser’s account, it is such exceptional occurrences that beg the question, just what is the nature of these so-called Earth rays? Are they really of the Earth, or are they more a product of the dowser themselves?
I have just be informed about this by the American Society of Dowsers,
about the FREE Virtual 2020 West Coast Dowsers Conference, now on-going…
It is the 2020 Virtual West Coast Dowsers Conference.
July 3 – 7, 2020,(Friday to Tuesday)
A 5 day, 24 hour a day extravaganza, on a computer or smartphone near you!
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 …
There appears to have been a lively dowsing fraternity in France at the beginning of the 20th Century. The dowsing society “society of friends of radiesthesie” was established early on, by the Abbé Bouly, one of a line of priest dowsers, who had made significant advances in the application of the dowsing pendulum. In effect, there was a French school of dowsing, which was to influence dowsing practice for a goof part of the century.
For instance, the Abbé Mermet, the son of a dowser, also worked as a dowser for more than 40 years, and was active in the first half of the 20th Century. He developed an exceptional degree of skill in the use of the pendulum. He made a number of “discoveries”, including dowsing at a distance (Téléradiesthésie), the use of “samples” and the presence of certain “rays”. A record of his methods and experiences is contained in his book “Comment j’opère “. He also wrote “Principles & Practice of Radiesthesia. A Textbook for Practitioners and Students”.
He may have been the first to use “serial numbers” in dowsing. A given object has a kind of signature, involving the movement of a pendulum. The dowser holds the pendulum in one hand, between thumb and index finger, and then holds his other hand near or above the object. When this is done, the pendulum performs a certain number of oscillations (swings backwards and forwards), followed by the same number of rotations (also known a gyrations), together these movements form the first “series”. This series then ends mand the pendulum hesitates for a moment, then repeats the same number in a new direction (perhaps also in the same direction), and continues to do so indefinitely, as long as the operator holds his hand near or above the body under observation.
The number of oscillations, or rotations, in a series is the “serial number” of the object. He gives the example of silver, for which he observed six oscillations, followed by six rotations. Then it starts again. The figure six is the characteristic “serial number” of silver. He considered the serial numbers to be an objective measure, citing the fact that some experienced dowsers, if they had learned to hold the pendulum correctly, had obtained the same numbers. But he admits that some sensitive beginners tended to get higher numbers.
Another important method in his dowsing work was the use of various “rays”. While reading the following explanation, it might help to refer to the diagram in :
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/rays.jpg
The most important of his ray discoveries was the “fundamental ray”. He claimed that every body has a fundamental ray, emanating from it, directed at a fixed angle with respect to the North-South direction. It may also be inclined with a constant angle to the horizontal. The direction of the fundamental ray is always away from the object. The ray has a length which is proportional to the mass of the body, and given the same weight of various bodies, to their power of “radiation”.
He gives an example of a silver coin, of weight 10 grams. The direction of fundamental ray is towards the East and has a length of 10 cm. Contrast this with a copper coin of weight 10 grams. The direction of fundamental ray is 45° South-West and has a length of 5 cm.
For an example of its use see the following article from the BSD journal. Here the fundamental ray is used in the tanning of leather.
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No55_1947_p144.pdf
A second ray which Mermet discovered was the “mental ray”. This links an object to the dowser and to any other person. It appears to come directly from the object to the brain of the observer. He considered it to be the second most important ray, after that of the fundamental ray.
A third ray he discovered was the “witness ray”. He claimed that every type of body sends out a ray towards another fragment of the same kind as itself. For example, if there are two silver coins and two copper coins in a room, a ray will link up the silver coins together, and another ray will do the same with the copper coins, but no ray will go from silver to copper. He considered this to be extraordinarily useful. For example, consider the case of a gold coin hidden, or lost, in a room. Another gold coin (the witness) can be placed on a table and the dowser then walks round the table. As soon as they pass between it and the searched for coin, the witness ray will be intercepted, and the pendulum, held in the right hand, will give the serial number for gold.
Finally, there is another ray, which was first discovered by another eminent dowser, named Abbé Bouly, who named it the “solar ray”. However, Mermet discovered that it had more properties than Bouly had ascribed to it and renamed it the “luminous ray”. It seemed to Mermet that the ray constantly linked an object either to the sun (even when masked by clouds), or to any artificial light source. (Bouly had thought this ray was only associated with the sun and that it only existed during daylight.)
The works of Mermet and Bouly proved influential in the use of the pendulum, and its use was further promoted by another dowser named, the Vicomte Henry de France. He wrote an influential book entitled “The Modern Dowser”, published in 1930. As with the Abbé Mermet, his method of pendulum dowsing was to identify an object through its “series”, which was the unique manner in which the pendulum gyrated over a sample of that object. His pendulum comprised a hemp string pone metre long, rolled on a little stick with notches at the end. The pendulum was suspended over the sample and the string unwound until a length is reached at which gyration begins; this could be either clockwise or anti-clockwise. The string length was fixed using the notches on the stick. Over different objects the pendulum would exhibit a number of periods of gyrations, taking place one after the other. For example, the pendulum gyrates in a certain direction. The dowser then stops the pendulum. Next the pendulum is set oscillating and it starts gyrating again in the same direction. Then it is stopped and restarted and again starts to gyrate. After N such periods, the pendulum stops gyrating and simply oscillates, or it gyrates in the opposite direction. The value of N is said to be the “serial number” of the object. For example, he gives some examples of serial number: Chalk,3; diamond, 6; coal, 18=3×6. A refinement of the system was to make to make the pendulum bob a sample of the object sought, or the sample was held in the hand that held the pendulum. Each dowser had to work out their own list of series
Another contribution to pendulum dowsing was made by an English dowser, T.C. Lethbridge, an archaeologist and Anglo-Saxon expert. Lethbridge devised his own method of pendulum dowsing, although it shared some similarities to those methods mentioned previously. By adjusting the length of string, his oscillating pendulum, would gyrate in a circular motion, indicating that the object, was detected. This process aided by holding a sample, or a picture, or simply imaging the object/thought. Every object had a detection length, which could result in a pendulum length exceeding well over a metre. Through his experiments, he was able to compile a table of string lengths corresponding to various objects, eg 22 inches for lead, 17 inches for truffles. Objects having the same pendulum length, could be distinguished by counting the number of oscillations that occurred over an object, before returning to oscillation, sometimes referred to as the “series”. For example, the metal silver and colour grey both caused gyrations for length 22inches, but silver caused 22 oscillations and grey caused only seven.
He even discovered that the pendulum could respond to abstract ideas, thoughts and emotions, eg death was 40 inches. In summary everything that he could detect could be done so with a pendulum length between zero and 40 inches. If the length of the string was increased then the sequence was repeated with 40 inches added, for example silver would be detected at 62 inches and the sequence repeated again after 80 inches. Lethbridge concluded, that the pendulum was not only reacting to the properties of the object sought, but was also acting as an extension of the dowser’s own mind.
In practice, this system has some fundamental problems. For many dowses, the length and series numbers they experience for a given item do not match with any other dowser’s. Furthermore, some items have identical length and series vales. These are apart from the facts that such a system takes time to calibrate and, given the length of the pendulum, can prove very unwieldly.
Ideas from the French school pervaded the early and mid-part of 20th Century dowsing practice. Ideas in general were pretty fixed, there was a bigger emphasis on the physical side of dowsing, including the type and composition of the dowsing instrument. By the 1960s, practice was becoming more personal, with a recognition that dowsers should find their own way of practicing. There was also a growing recognition, that there was a mental underpinning to dowsing and this caused much tension between the mentalists and the physicalists, as to what indeed caused the dowsing reaction. In effect though, dowsing practice is perhaps best understood as a kind of ritual, which the dowser follows to get the results they seek.
The following is a nice example of a lady who takes up dowsing. Se is initially bewildered by the methods she reads about, but finally discovers her own way and goes on to apply her new skills as a healer.
See “Let’s keep it simple”:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No199_1993_p13.pdf
This is merely a brief sketch of the recent historical development of the dowsing pendulum. Much has been omitted, but hopefully this missing practice will be covered by future postings.
The pendulum is probably the principle tool of the modern dowser. Therefore, it might be of some interest to provide a sketch of the history of this device. Here I provide several extracts covering its early history up until the early part of the 20th century. This early period sees dowsers using mostly the dowsing “rod”, which was typically the Y-rod, but could also take other forms (even a German sausage). There appears to be little written about the use of the pendulum by run of the mill dowsers. However, we do have accounts by several intellectuals of their day, who took an interest in the working of the pendulum. This was possibly related to the recent discovery of electricity and magnetism.
One of the greatest reviews of dowsing was undertaken by Sir William Barrett, founder of the Society for Psychical Research, and published together with Theodore Besterman, in the early part of the 20th Century, in their book “The Divining Rod”. In his review of the history of dowsing, he mentions the first written account of dowsing practice by Agricola in his treatise “De Re Metallica”, published in 1556. In this, Agricola “…points out that very cogently that as the [dowsing] rod does not move in the hands of all men there cannot be any specific affinity between the object of the search and the rod : the phenomenon (which Agricola himself observed) must be due to some quality of the dowser himself.”
However, it was another who discovered what might actually activate the dowsing rod, or pendulum. A Jesuit, Athanasius Kircher, working in the middle of the 17th Century, performed many dowsing experiments. He connected the movement of the dowsing rod with that of the pendulum. Furthermore, he concluded that the action of any dowsing device was due to unconscious muscular actions on the art of the dowser.
In “Divining” by Christopher Bird, an encyclopaedic account of dowsing, by a former Vice-President of the American Association of Dowsers, he covers the early history of pendulum use, which he suggests may extend back to Roman times. You can read an excerpt here:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/Bird_Divining_p123.pdf
During his historical sweep, he focusses on Johann Ritter, who appears to be the first true scientist to study the dowsing pendulum, around the end of the 18th Century. By careful study of the motion of the pendulum when used by an experienced dowser, Ritter noted that different substances produced different signature movements in the pendulum. He became convinced that the pendulum was acted on by some yet unknown force, derived from living organisms, including the dowser, and from inanimate objects. The action arose as a result of the dowser’s intention. This intention could be in the form of a question, and the pendulum would provide the answer by an interpretation of is movement. It seems that Ritter made good use of this in his research.
It seems that at this time, in France, a certain Professor Gerboin, had also been making a long and in depth study concerning the action of the pendulum, the results of which suggested that the user could illicit or handicap the pendulum’s movements, substantiating Ritter’s work. The French scientist Michel-Eugene Chevreul, followed up on Gerboin’s conclusions, working from the early to mid-19th Century, was considered at the time, the standard treatise on dowsing, “De la baguette divinatoire” (1854). Bird states that Chevreul had effectively discovered what we now refer to as psychokinesis (PK), the effect of mental intention over matter, but stopped short of concluding such. It seems instead, he attributed all of the movements of the pendulum to auto-suggestion, and ruled out any supernatural, spiritistic, electrical or magnetic force explanation for the phenomena. Rather than advancing dowsing, he had hindered its understanding.
However, also working in the mid-19th Century, was an English scientist, J. Rutter. He did conduct some interesting research on the PK effect on pendulums. Using an experimental rig named the “magnetoscope,” Rutter seems to have demonstrated PK effects, and also demonstrated ways in which the pendulum could be used as a dowsing instrument, for example with the use of samples. This is briefly covered in the Bird article, but a fuller account is given in the BSD journal:
“Early experiments with the pendulum”,
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No88_1955_p195.pdf
Throughout the 19th Century the idea of “Animal magnetism”, proposed by Franz Mesmer in the 18th century, was an influential belief; the idea of an invisible force arising from all living things, which could have physical effects. It inspired much research, such as that of Rutter’s. Another example that Bird mentions is Baron Karl von Reichenbach, who built on Rutter’s work. Reichenbach was an impressive researcher, working with many psi-gifted subjects. He was convinced of the existence of a PK like force, which he named “od”, or “odic” force. His work was sometimes referred to by members of the BSD, but now he is largely forgotten.
See: “Reichenbach”, in :
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSD_No48_1945_p173.pdf
Finally, Bird describes the work of Johann Karl Bahr, who he says essentially laid down the basis for all dowsing practice that followed. Bahr contended that things had “inner values”, which were only recognised by the particular effect they have on the movement of the dowser’s pendulum.
In the latter half of the 19th Century, there seems to be less scientific interest in the pendulum, but in France, there began in interest in dowsing by a series of priest (Abbe) dowsers, whose work influenced much of the dowsing practice of the 20th Century. More in part 2.
Here’s a piece from the BSD journal written by the late Dan Wilson, a very experienced dowser and engineer, who reflected much on the “mechanics” of dowsing.
“The failure of dowsing under test” :
http://www.dowsing-research.net/blog_extracts/BSDP_No280_2003_p3.pdf
Here he reflects on why dowsers seem to perform so badly in “scientific” trials, in contrast to their performance when dowsing in whatever “area” they specialise in. When one reads of the experiences of dowsers, their successes can be rather striking, but one does not get this same perception from the published studies on dowsing, see:
http://www.dowsing-research.net/
Wilson suggests that dowsers often put their failure down to the hostility of the investigator, an example of whom he gives as James Randi. Randi was offering a financial prize for those who could demonstrated any type of psychic ability. Wilson refers to Randi’s test of dowsers, which was broadcast on British TV in 1992. The footage of this survives and may currently be found on YouTube:
“Dowsing (1991-08-07) – James Randi – Psychic Investigator”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=le1qisF3j-o
The two dowsers tested were successful overall in performing the set tasks. They were members of the BSD and both were very gifted dowsers. Wilson attributes their success to them applying a form of psychic “protection” (see below) from Randi’s detrimental and sceptical intent.
In his article, Wilson concentrates on those practicing complimentary medicine, a field he was very familiar with. He reflects on why studies performed by the dowsing practitioners themselves also may fail to show very little or no effect. He refers to a 2002 study by “FACT”, (it is not clear what organisation this acronym represents). In this study run by a homeopathic institution, the participants, several homeopaths, failed to perform a given dowsing task. See the following:
“Can homeopaths detect homeopathic medicines by dowsing? A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial”,
He suggests that the principle cause of failure is because dowsing is a mental operation, and the dowser’s intention is different when they are under test, from when they are engaged in their normal work, in which they seek results in a confident and focussed manner. In this latter case the dowser accepts without question, that dowsing will produce the required results. This contrasts with dowsing under test, where the purpose is to demonstrate that dowsing works. Mentally the dowsers do not “own” the test, (they give up ownership to the investigator instead). And as he points out, the results of any trial can then be subject to the expectations of the investigator (the psi-mediated “experimenter effect” in parapsychology), or even the expectations of any larger group. Interestingly then, Wilson seems to imply that it is the ability to take ownership of the dowsing task, that confers the “protection”.
Another reason for failure, and one that most dowsers might ascribe to, is the hostility of the investigator. This parallels findings in parapsychology, in which investigators with a belief in psi do better than those who hold no such beliefs. Again, this is a kind of psi-mediated experimenter effect. Perhaps closely associated with this, is what you might term “performance anxiety”, the stress of being evaluated while dowsing, and of not getting it right.
He identifies several other issues, and one of these is something that many dowsers have agreed with in their writings, the lack of a “need to know” can impair a dowser’s performance.
He concludes with the suggestion that rather than formally testing dowsers with “artificial” tasks, it would be better to conduct “field studies”, looking at the results dowsers obtain over time in their chosen field of expertise. For example, the work published by Betz:
“Unconventional Water Detection: Field Test of the Dowsing Technique in Dry Zones: Parts 1 and 2” :
Journal of Scientific Exploration, 9, 1, 1-43 (1995)
And
Journal of Scientific Exploration, 9, 2, 159-189 (1995)
In the absence of a comprehensive theory of psi functioning, the need to prove the existence of psi is always present. But repeating tests designed to demonstrate the effects seem increasingly pointless. Instead, more could be gained by viewing psi and its application through dowsing, as a goal-orientated process and best studied in the field and through the lived experiences of dowsers.
