Many dowsers ask permission to engage in dowsing. In the BSD, you will find this referred to by them asking the questions: “Can I? May I? Should I?”. The format is
State
what you want to to achieve by dowsing, then ask
“Can
I?” (dowse for this)
“May
I?” (dowse for this)
“Should
I?” (dowse for this)
It seems that in the history of dowsing, that this is
a relatively modern phenomenon. The first printed reference to it appears in
1986, in the book “Spiritual Dowsing” by a renowned American dowser named Sig
Lonegren. Here he recommends using the questions as a focussing exercise prior to
actual dowsing. Note that he uses “Am I ready to do it?”, rather than “Should I?”,
the lack of should appears not to appear to imply the same ethical question. Sig
Lonegren’s ideas appeared to have been influenced by another eminent dowser
named Terry Ross. In BSD journal no239, 1992, Terry Ross quotes “Can I? May I? Should
I?”, the form quoted today (within the BSD).
Sig Lonegren says that failure to get a yes to the questions means that the dowsing results will be unreliable.
In the late 1990s, a member of the BSD, named Dudley Wheeler,
surveyed members of the society on their views about asking permission. He suggested
that requesting permission did not much predate 1970. He was surprised to find
that many were hostile to the idea, or did not do it.
The first results of his investigations are recorded in a newsletter of special interest group, part of the BSD,
About the granting of permission: “The simplest answer
to ‘who gives permission’ is that it is your own sub-conscious mind which
provides the response, based upon your own set of moral and ethical values.
This simple answer does not satisfy everybody.”
Some of the verbatim feedback is recorded here, in “Update in seeking permission to dowse”,
If we assume that all members were capable dowsers, then it seems that asking permission is not a necessary prerequisite to successful dowsing. Perhaps what it really shows is a shift in emphasis in dowsing over time. It has moved away from seeking physical entities like underground water, utilising a dowsing effect mediated by radiations, to matters like health and well-being, and “Earth energies”. Dowsing is interacting with the life of others, and so the ethics of dowsing becomes more important, but also there seems to be a realisation that something else, other than the dowser, might be involved in making that dowsing work.
This is an account of another application of dowsing.
Historically psi has been thought of as a group of faculties – telepathy,
clairvoyance, psychokinesis. More recent thinking sees these as simply
different expressions of psi. And I think the practice of dowsing bears out
this assertion. The mind over matter element we have already encountered in
healing, but I believe that dowsing offers many more examples. Some have been
applied to agriculture and here is an example, which is particularly
interesting because of the amount of effort that has been expended into
exploring its use.
The account relates to the farming of a particular variety of narcissus flower – the Soleil d’or – on the Isles of Scilly. It is based on the work of a horticultural researcher named A.P. Tabraham, whose published his research in a short booklet: “Solar Energy and Dowsing”. http://www.dowsing-research.net/dowsing/articles/Tabraham-solar_energy_and_dowsing.pdf
The links above give a more than full account, but
here is a very brief over view.
The research information has been extracted from the
very informative private publication entitled “Solar Energy and
Dowsing” by A.P. Tabraham, Isles of Scilly 1982. Tabraham was an
enthusiastic horticultural researcher who was intrigued by the early flowering
of the narcissus,
The Scillonian farmers who raised these narcissi,
needed them to flower before Christmas in order to receive higher premiums
during the Christmas market period. This required special treatment of the
planted bulbs. The chosen method was to loosely spread straw over the planted
ground at mid-summer and set it alight. This brought the bulbs through the
ground 2-3 weeks sooner than bulbs which had not been treated in this way, the
latter finally flowered in the early new year. The origin of the practice was
unknown, as was the mechanism. It was applied for maybe 50 years until it
became uneconomic.
While investigating other approaches, it seems that
quite fortuitously, dowsing might provide at least some answers, if not a
solution. A series of trials were
performed in which propane fires were used to heat the ground, in place of the
straw and ground thermometers used to compare the temp of the treated ground
with the untreated ground. This proved effective and more economic. Treatments
were applied at fortnightly intervals, the more treatments applied, the greater
the temperature difference, with a change of approx. 2°F per treatment (up to 3
treatments), which persisted over the following year. The bulbs in the warmer ground duly flowered
earlier. Now it was discovered that a dowser could clearly identify the burnt
regions, even 6 months after the burning had been applied and furthermore, the
bulbs showed a dowsing reaction.
Later, it seems that quite by accident, the
temperature rise could actually be caused
by dowsing. But they discovered that ferrous objects could remove the effect,
the greater the mass of metal involved, the faster the effect was removed.
There was also the observation that despite different farmers using the same novel
burning technique, it tended to fail for the “tidiest” farmers, where-as less
tidy farmers got excellent results. This effect they put down to the fact that
tidier farmers would tend to plough the ground after burning to re-ridge the
fields. The steel plough had removed the effect.
They searched the dowsing literature to find a novel
way of applying the dowsing effect without using any burning effect. They
concluded with the following simple technique. Simply trace out a pentagon
(regular or irregular did not matter). This could be done by tracing with a
stick on the ground, or by marking five points on the ground to form the
outline of a pentagon, while walking around the field. It was not necessary to
have any real physical line marking out the whole pentagon. The essential thing
was that the first point must be touched again after walking around the
perimeter, to compete the pentagon, absolutely no gap at all was allowed, otherwise
the dowsing effect was lost. If done correctly, the dowsing effect was created
immediately, over the entire area within the pentagon and created a temperature
rise of 2°F, (the same as, or slightly better than, the burning over process).
If two additional pentagons were added, at fortnightly intervals, the
temperature rise was 3-4°F, and for three, 5-6°F, depending on the ambient heat
(see later), but adding additional pentagons made no significant difference.
They had devised a dowsing solution, which was more
economic and effective than the burning over method and one which could be
adapted to any area. It could also be used on other crops. For example, the
increase in ground temperature using three pentagons had decreased the germination
of Freesia seed from four weeks to two. Winter broccoli, sweet corn and early potatoes
were also found to benefit.
There were some additional intriguing observations.
They discovered that the effect within the pentagoned areas tended to move
south by approximately 6-9 feet per year. This movement mainly took place with
the ground was full of water in December and January. Another effect was that
anything that had been exposed to the “dowsing effect” within the pentagon (or
by burning over) appeared to “connect” with any available heat source (above
ambient). The connection could be identified by dowsing and along this “flowed”
heat to the object. So plants outside appeared to connect with the atmosphere
directly above them. Or if indoors, they might connect to an electric file.
Glass or plastic did not stop this connection, but thin paper did. The temp
rise per days was also found to be linked to the number of hours of sunshine
that day, but rises were still observed in the absence of direct sunlight.
Tabraham published his data in the first publication. This is best reviewed as graphs.
Above is data from 1979. It compares the average maximum daily temperature, averaged over each month, for ground which had been burnt over three times (red line), compared with ground which had no treatment (blue line). A consistent elevation of temperature is observed, with the difference increasing towards mid-summer.
Above is the data taken in1980, after the pentagon treatment had been introduced. It compares the average maximum daily temperature, averaged over each month, for ground which had been burnt over three times (red line), ground which had been treated with three pentagons (black line) and ground which had no treatment (blue line). The pentagon treatment produced a slightly elevated warming effect.
Since the publication of the work, other members of
the BSD have taken interest.
In this article the author adds some additional
information obtain directly from communication with Tabraham. The latter
asserts: that it is in fact not necessary to “walk” the perimeter of the
pentagon, the creator can simply rotate themselves making five points as they
do; the pentagon can be as grossly irregular as necessary; the effect can be
applied to the warming of buildings.
In these two letters, a London dowsing group attempt a replication of the experient. In the first they describe how the pentagon was created. See the letters section, a letter from John Baker :
They succeeded in creating a persistent pentagon, but
there was no significant warming effect within this, however the area did move
south as observed by Tabraham. Despite noting an intention to repeat the
experiment, no other report was printed.
Finally, some dowsers used the pentagon method to add
modest warmth to their own homes. They claim it is possible to do this by
simply drawing pentagon on a plan of the property.
See “Using the dowsing effect to cut your eating bill”:
Although the published information is not sufficient
to evaluate the results in any rigorous manner, they do seem to suggest the
presence of a definite effect. No attempt was made in the original repots to
explain why the effects occurred, but it seems to demonstrate a mind over
matter (PK) effect. The intention to
treat the ground to bring forward the flowering process appears to be the
fundamental action. The intention seemed to be expressed in three ways – the
two types of burning over the ground (one with straw the other with propane), and
the simple delineation of an area (mentally or physically).
We are not told how many farmers adopted the two later
treatments (propane and pentagon), but it is interesting that the methods did
not work for them all, and often it was the tidy farmers, who saw no effect. This
was attributed to post-treatment ploughing the ground by the tidy farmers, the
treatment failed to work if ferrous objects were introduced into the treated
area. This might of course be true, however, when one studies the dowsing
literature, ferrous metals seem to hold a special interest with dowsers
(sometimes for their links with magnetism, another subject of interest). It is
not inconceivable that confounding problem was created mentally. Therefore, it
could be something to do with the differing mentalities of the tidy versus the
non-tidy farmers, that influenced the success or otherwise. Interestingly, no
such comment was made about the straw burning method, which apparently seemed
to work for all.
The use of a pentagon shape was allegedly derived from
dowsing texts. It is interesting to speculate whether a pentagon was effective
because it had some mystic significance for many? It may well be the case that
any shape could be used, as long as the one who applied it believes in its
significance. The tracing out of the pentagon also involved some ritualistic
behaviour, emphasising its importance.
Finally, another interesting observation was that the
warming effect appeared to be drawing heat from the closest available heat
sources, there seemed to be some invisible channel down which the heat was
transferred. Although this could only be demonstrated by dowsing.
Since it’s VE day (8th May), here’s a post
relating to WW2. The BSD existed before WW2, and its journal does include some
articles relating to it. This short article is about the life of a dower – Mr.
M. Meier – in occupied Luxemburg. It is a portrait taken from another,
published in the French dowsing journal of the time, Radiesthesie pour Tous. It
seems that he was an excellent dowser, making some interesting observations, but
this this nearly cost him his life. He would have made an excellent spy.
The reference to Vinnitsa in the Ukraine concerns “The Wehrwolf”
bunkers, a smaller version of the Wolf’s Lair, Hitler’s fortified headquarters
in Eastern Prussia and presumably top secret at that time.
Incidentally, it appears that in WW2, the German government
had a rather ambiguous attitude towards dowsing. The following excerpt is a brief note from page
67 of the BSD Journal No26, 1940…
“The Evening Standard of Oct 21st 1940 Stated that Le Journal reports from Switzerland that Hitler has sent a corps of 7000 water diviners to the Siegfried Line.
The German General staff were doubtful about the value of the corps, but Hitler silenced objections by recalling that in 1918, during the setting in place of a great gun that shelled Paris, water diviners were consulted to ensure that the emplacements would remain dry.”
It was in use in the German army at least until 1943. The following article provides some further insights, including the use of dowsing by prisoners of war and a remark about Adolf Hitler’s deputy, Rudolf Hess and his flight to Britain in 1941. It is under “Notes and News“:
Modern day dowsers seem
to concentrate much of their work on what are variously termed “Earth
energies”. These come in various forms, having various names, but generally are
thought of as lines of “influence” (if simplified, rather like the dowsing line
above an underground stream). They seem to be only detectable by dowsing,
although there has been some suggestion that some instruments, such as scintillation
counters, or magnetometers also respond to them. Much has been written about
these energies, because there is a concern about the effects of them on people’s
health. The general idea is that long exposure to them, is associated with a
variety of both physical and mental health complaints. For instance, such
prolonged exposure might occur if one’s bed is located over. Therefore, many
dowsers concern themselves with the detection of these energies, on behalf of
other people, so that some intervention can be made to prevent, or at least
alleviate, the harmful effects. It is a very big subject, which we can only
touch upon.
Some dowsers claim that people have had an understanding of Earth energies from prehistoric times. The current day interest appears to stem from the work by a German dowser named Freiherr von Pohl, who was active in the 1930s. He described the effects of these Earth energies on plants and animals. From all these observations he considered that they would be harmful to humans. He then made a study of a town named Vilsbiburg, which was considered to have a high incidence of cancer deaths. Von Pohl dowsed the town and postulated an association between cancer deaths and subterranean water. His results were published in his book in 1932. This link shows some of his results.
His work is reviewed along with a good review of the European
approach to Earth energies is given by
Ilse Pope, in an article entitled “A view of Earth energies from continental
Europe”
He was followed by Dr. Manfred
Curry, a Doctor, who did similar research in Southern Germany between 1935 and
1953. He deduced that the Earth energies formed a regularly spaced net, running
from South/West to North/East, now termed the “Curry Net”. If a person was
unfortunate enough to reside under a crossing point on this net, their health
would suffer.
This work was followed soon after
by a Dr Hartmann, who also discovered an regularly spaced “energy” net, this
time running east-west, later termed the “Hartmann net”. He published his
results in a book. The effects of which were thought not to be as harmful as
either the Curry net of underground streams.
The article also describes the results of extensive
work conducted by Kaethe Bachler, who has written extensively about many cases,
in which using dowsing, the causes of various illnesses and mental disorders
have been found to be associated with either the Curry grid, or underground streams,
or a combination of the two acting together.
A review of her book – “Earth Radiation. The startling discoveries of a dowser” – is given here:
Finally, as a point of
interest, an article appeared in a BSD Journal in 1988 (No221, p317), which
reviews some of the various Earth energies, including the fore-mentioned grids, (and “black streams” , commonly found by
English dowsers, and thought to induce poor health. Interestingly, the
author states.
English dowsers will find black
energies, earth energies or ley lines depending on their experience and
personal viewpoint. They do not find Curry grids or Hartmann grids. Continental
dowsers do not find these energies at all. They find Curry grids and Hartmann
grids. Different dowsers will find different grids.
Here’s a tail for Anzac Day (25th April). Some readers might be familiar with the 2014 film, The Water Diviner, directed by and starring Russell Crowe, set in Gallipoli in World War 1. Although this was a fictional account, there does exist a true account of the work of an actual water diviner, named Stephen Kelley. An account of his story was first published in 1916 in The British-Australasian newspaper, and then reprinted in the BSD journal in 1951. The account speaks for itself, but it is perhaps indicative of the interest in dowsing by the British military, an interest that goes back further than WW1, but is based on the fact that, when practiced by a good diviner, dowsing delivers.
Another common use of dowsing is its use for medical
diagnose and treatment. Within the journal of the British Society of Dowsers,
is an article by Philip Rogers, which is a reprint of a lecture he gave to the
International Veterinary Acupuncture Society in 1982. In this he gives a
helpful and comprehensive summary of the principle methods of psychic diagnosis
and healing. Although his talk was delivered before vets, the methods apply to
both humans and animals. There is much written about healing within the dowsing
literature and this article is reproduced here, to help serve as an
introduction to the subject.
He begins with a description of some dowsing devices.
Apart from the Y rod and the pendulum, which we have met in previous posts, “angle
irons”, which are L shared rods. There is the mention of the “the rubbing pad”.
Here the dowser rubs their finger(s) over a rubber pad, and the amount of
resistance they feel, is a measure of the correctness of the answer sought. (Incidentally,
in a manner similar to use of a pad, some dowsers practice a form of
device-less search, in which they rub together their thumb and index-finger). The
rubbing pad is a method favoured in some dowsing-based diagnostic instruments
used in radionics. (Basically, radionics is diagnosis and healing using a
specialised instrument that “broadcasts” some form of radiation to the
patient). Dowsing devices though at not always necessary, as with practice,
device-less dowsing, involving “involuntary muscle twitches” (blink dowsing), can
be used. Or the practitioner can just “know” when they find something.
The practitioner can use such instruments, or
otherwise, to divine the diagnosis, either in the presence of the patient, or
remotely perhaps with the help of a photograph, or diagram, by systematically
asking questions and waiting for answers. Interestingly, the range of possible diagnoses
is much broader, using divining, than it would be using conventional methods.
But at the same time, if care is not taken to become “detached” from the
situation, diagnosis can be influenced by any preconceived ideas held by the practitioner.
Mr Rogers specialised in acupuncture and he gives a
couple of examples applying his methodology to animals. In one, he mentions the
effect caused by when underground streams cross. Many dowsers report that the
health of living things, that spend too much time above such the crossing points,
can be seriously affected. Much is
written in the dowsing literature about this effect and how it can be remedied.
Mr Rogers states that driving an iron bar into the ground directly over a steam,
while upstream of the crossing point, can remove the effect. (Although used in
the search for water, this is reminiscent of a similar technique to cancel
stream effects, in the post of 6th April 2020 – “A different technique for
water divining”). We will come back to the effect of underground steams in
future posts.
He makes some interesting observations on acupuncture
points and diagnosis through taking the patient’s pulse. In summary he seems to
suggest that both are fundamentally mental exercises akin to dowsing reactions.
Therefore, a good practitioner is one who has worked out their one technique,
which they can believe in and therefore use with confidence. For instance, he
uses a kind of remote viewing diagnostic technique. His comment that the manner in which children
“see”, contrasts with that of adults, is particularly pertinent. It suggests
that we construct differing realities dependent on our mentalities, and it is
that constructed reality which is what we really perceive.
He concludes with a review of common forms of healing
practice. Homeopathy is perhaps the most recognisable, and is often used together
with dowsing, the dowsing reaction is used to infer the most compatible remedy
and its dose for the patient in question. Laying on of hands is perhaps what
most people might think of when considering healers at work. But this proximity
often seems unnecessary, as healing can be achieved remotely, with or without
any kind of sample to represent the patient. What perhaps characterises all of these
practices, seems to be the belief of the practitioner that they can help, and therefore have the intention to heal, often using some
visualisation technique, either mental, or symbolic. Also, many healers refer
to an exchange of some healing “energy”, citing results of Kirlian photography.
Or in the case of radionics, the radionics device can both diagnose illness,
and then “broadcast healing waveforms” (energy). Though this method is often
derided, because the device often has no working electrical component. However,
this is to miss the point, since it appears to be acting as a mental prop or
sample to the practitioner who, as in all these methods, is healing with their
mind. Finally, he seems to suggest, that the ability to diagnose and heal, is
more of an innate skill, only be available to a minority (though being wary of aware
of “charlatans”). Therefore, it remains
difficult for many most people to accept. But in the end, the efficacy of their
work, depends on confirmation by more mainstream methods
The article, entitled “Psychic methods of diagnosis and treatment and acupuncture and homeopathy” is here:
There are plenty of dowsing failures. Even dowsers of long
standing will sometimes not get the results that they expect. Some people take
up dowsing immediately, perhaps after watching a dowser at work, who then
encourages them to “have a go”. But for
others it can be harder. The consensus amongst dowsers, seems to be that the vast
majority of people can dowse if they put their mind to it, which means they
have to learn and practice, but that a significant minority, (sometimes put at
around 10% of people) simply cannot dowse at all.
The following article is a letter written to the BSD by a particularly frustrated beginner, named Mr Gunning. He had obviously read several books on dowsing and had purchased some devices. The books must have suggested that he start with some simple search exercises, referred to as “parlour tricks”. However, he was not achieving any success and he expressed his evident frustration in his letter, see:
One cannot help thinking that some of the replies were quite patronising. Furthermore, the language used was sometimes incomprehensible and unhelpful to non-dowsers. For example, what are interrupters and there was mention of “evil spirits”! However, there are several points which the writers stress as being important to the practice of dowsing and therefore worthy of note: being suitably relaxed; having a real need to know the answer; beware of being too over-confident; maintain humility; find something of personal interest to dowse for; and then practice. Some respondents suggested that, the ability to dowse with any degree of success, might only come after six months or more of trying. Sadly, Mr Gunning was obviously offended by many of the replies and presumably never attempted to dowse again.
Finally, the story is worth reflecting upon when one considers many of the experiments which have been conducted to “prove” whether dowsing actually works. In particular, whether the subjects of such experiments are seasoned dowsers, or perhaps more likely, college students simply handed a dowsing device. Then how is such an experiment is conducted, is the procedure artificial, or more akin to a real-World situation? And we have not even mentioned the attitudes and abilities of the experimenter in charge.
We
normally associate dowsers with forked twigs, pendulum, or other dowsing devices.
However, these are not strictly necessary. Device-lass dowsing is quite
popular. One of the modern pioneers of this was the late Dan Wilson. He popularised
the idea of “blink dowsing”, in which the involuntary blinking of the dowser’s
eyes is associated with the dowsing response. Incidentally, many dowsers have
reported unusual physiological effects when walking over subterranean water, or
mineral deposits. Mr Wilson was not the first to blink dowse. It is said that
the practice was first recorded by a clergyman in the eighteenth century, who found
that he blinked spontaneously over subterranean water.
The article is a short letter that Mr Wilson sent to the British Society of Dowsers. See “Letters to the Editor” ….
He wrote the letter in response to an earlier BSD article, claiming that dowsing tools were unnecessary, but that some effort was required to dowse in this “device-less” manner.
Mr Wilson
tells of how the new method did not work for him, if he consciously ran through
the possible answers to the dowsing question in his mind, until his eyes blinked
at the correct answer. Instead he used his hand to indicate possible answers. He
doesn’t elaborate on this, perhaps he ran his hand over a predefined list of ailments?
But interestingly the magnitude of the blink was related to the truthfulness of
the answer. He was a very gifted individual and developed the ability relatively
quickly and thus demonstrated that the need for tools is unnecessary.
He often used
his dowsing ability to diagnose and treat medical issue. The latter part of the
letter discusses ideas about how mentally activated healing might work. But we
can leave that for a later post.
This post is a departure from the usual posts, looking
at the applications of dowsing. Many dowsers have offered up their speculations,
about how dowsing works. Although these are sometimes proposed with
considerable authority, when one looks back at these explanations over the
years, one cannot help coming to the conclusion that dowsers should probably just
stick to their dowsing. Certainly, the lack of a comprehensive theory underpinning,
not just dowsing, but psi-related activities in general, is a problem for those
who wish to convince die hard materialists of the efficacy of these activities.
The approach I am taking in this blog, is simply to recount the myriad ways in which
dowsing is and has been applied. Interested readers may take away from this
what they will.
However, of the accounts I have read, there is one that stands out. This was written by a dowser named Alasdair Beal. After eliminating common explanations, he makes the novel conclusion that dowsing is “the art of foretelling possible futures”. This is done through the search question(s) which the dowser poses, and the dowser duly gets a result, even if they never receive any feedback.
Although he does not elaborate further on the idea, one might consider that each possible future is then feeding information back to the dowser working at an earlier time, about how things turned out. Of cause there’s the thorny issue of causality, but that our understanding of that seems to be rather a mess anyway. If one considers, from physics, the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, and from parapsychology, the retro-causal experiments of Helmut Schmidt, for instance, maybe Mr Beal has an interesting point to make.
Anyway, the article, entitled “A theory of dowsing”, is here:
This article by Enid Smithett is another from the same BSD journal
of the mid-1970s, as that of the Scott-Elliott in the post of 08-04-2020. It is rather a long article, since it is a
transcription of one of her talks, but her dowsing experiences demonstrate some
remarkable aspects dowsing. It is easy to miss these on first reading, and so the
article is well worth re-reading.
Her speciality is map dowsing, and the description she gives
of her work only confirms that dowsing has a mental basis. For her, the map
becomes a kind of doorway into a reality, which parallels the physical one in
which we exist, but a reality that is amenable to her thoughts and intentions. In
this mental reality, she can free herself from things which might otherwise interfere
with here dowsing results, and thereby concentrate solely what she is seeking. She
stresses that “the dowsing is always correct”, however, she speaks of the
difficulty in transposing the results between mental and physical realities. This
she says, can lead to mistakes of interpretation, something that also affects
other map dowsers.
The list of confounding factors in map dowsing is diverse,
involving other people, physical objects and even time. For example, in the same manner as the rémanence
effect we have encountered in earlier posts, she finds that a map can retain
information about those who have handled it previously. So, she uses a technique
of map tracing to create a “clean” copy of the map, free from such contaminations.
And if she personalises the map in some way, for example by writing a date on
it, the map becomes a representation of the area covered, at that date, and consequently
the subsequent dowsing results also relate to that to subjects existing at that
date. As she says, “in dowsing we are separated from time, this is the whole
point of it”.
She sees a map as a means of focussing, in the same way that
dowsers use samples. When using samples, she is again wary of their contamination.
For example, an item of clothing might belong to one person, but be contaminated
by the presence of a hair belonging to another. Another example is a photograph taken from a newspaper,
will have text on the rear, from the contents of the following page, and this can
have an effect. It seems that the sample is not acting simply as a passive aide-memoir,
the actual content of the sample is actively engaging with the dowser’s
intention to seek. Therefore for better certainty, she tends to create her own
sample by writing down on paper, as much information as she can about the
subject sought.
She gives some examples of the results that she has obtained
by map dowsing. For example, when dowsing for underground streams, she never
detects the reaction bands parallel to the stream, which water diviners often
detect while dowsing on the ground. And she can obtain the depth of the stream.
She can trace the movements of people in
real-time. And as already mentioned, can dowse back in time.
She recounts an incident that illustrates well the effect of
a dowser’s preconceived ideas on their dowsing results. This is where she is
engaged in finding underground streams on a property. She detects three streams
while map dowsing, but only one when dowsing onsite at the property. The
difference came down to how she defined the boundaries of the property. “The
dowsing is always correct”, but the interpretation can go very wrong. The
solution would seem to be to choose one’s dowsing questions with great care. Furthermore,
she stresses the need to take responsibility for what you seek, without
referring to others for advice, and to focus attention on what really matters.
About the dowser’s tools and techniques. Some dowsers like herself, set great store by correctly orientating their map. This might be important to some, but probably just depends on any preconceived ideas. She points out the problem depending too much on the tools, since the tool does not matter, it is better to use our hands. She and other map dowsers can get feelings in the hands when they run over the map, before dowsing proper begins. What is interesting here is that the hands can work in independent ways, each appears to contribute its own information into the dowsing mix.
Many believe that dowsing is explained as a physiological
reaction to some external physical field. This was the view of most dowsers, I
would suggest, until perhaps the 1960s, when others started to challenge this
assumption, based on their own dowsing experiences. In this 1972 BSD article,
by Scott Elliot (former president of the BSD, who we have met previously in
post 28/03/2020), dowsing is seen as a purely mental activity. As he puts it,
it is based on a mankind’s ability to “know”. This ability is spread widely
over the population, with he suggests, up to 90% of the population being able
to dowse to a greater or lesser extent.
He talks of the most used technique in dowsing, that of
posing a suitable question and dowsing the answer, in the manner of Socratic
questioning. And this can be done from anywhere. The problem then is not the
dowsing, it is more about asking appropriate questions.
Here he gives some examples of some situations that appear
to confirm his assertion. For instance, his particular area of interest was
archaeology. And he describes his three-stage approach, with stage 1 being
working from home on a map, then conforming these findings in stage 2 by site
dowsing, before actually performing a dig. The advantages are that a large area
may be covered in a shorter time, than by conventional methods.
He asserts that the dowsing instrument has no particular
role as any kind of dowsing detector, that is the detector as such is the
dowser themselves and their tool is merely an indicator. To show this, he points
out that he often dowses with hands only (this is sometimes referred to as
deviceless dowsing), pointing out that for hm, this is effective over maps, or
human bodies. However, dowsing tools are helpful, and one might still use
different tools for different dowsing approaches, eg pendulum for map work and
rod for site work.
He mentions the use of samples. In earlier times, there was
an idea amongst dowsers that “like” substances or objects attracted each other
in some unknown (but physical) manner, which was essential to successful dowsing.
But taking the mental approach, they are seen only as a “mind focuser”, so
simply writing down the name of the object sought is enough. Samples can be
helpful in some circumstances but really are simply not necessary. They are an
example of a “shibboleth” (see also post 06-04-2020), or an idea, which one
must follow in order to dowse successfully. There are many of these in the
literature. He says however, that one must develop one’s own method that work
just for you. (We have seen this idea in previous posts, for example, on water
divining). Dowsing is a mental discipline and may take some time to master.
He sums up by saying that all dowsing is “seeking” and so to
seek well, one must have a good idea of what is sought, so background knowledge
about the subject is invaluable. Good knowledge about a subject can also
provide an all to important check on one’s dowsing results, which is important,
as preconceived ideas might confound the results. Another aspect of the seeking
though is “the need to know”, which in his experience, significantly improves
the dowsing ability. The other aspect is one’s own sensitivity and this comes
from training the mind to become more receptive, and with practice, the
essential confidence in one’s abilities develops
The article, entitled “The Modern Dowser”, is here:
This is a personal account by another water diviner, Clive
Beadon, who describes some general features of dowsing and his own technique for
locating water. This account written a couple of decades on from the previous
posts, incorporates some different features from those earlier methods,
presumably incorporating newer ideas.
Like many dowsers, he took up dowsing, after observing a
dowser at work and being encouraged to try it himself. He tells an amusing tail
of dowsing from an aircraft, as a means of practice (there are a number of
instances of this in the British Society of Dowsers’ journal).
He stresses the need to only apply one’s dowsing to particular
specific areas. This is because the key to dowsing is the proper interpretation
of the dowsing reactions. The dowser is constantly learning, and he found that
his dowsing technique was constantly changing. The important factor is one’s “mental
attitude”, should be “determination and certainty”, and one should be aware “Shibboleths”,
that is attitudes and ways of working which only hamper interpretation. Instead
use direct and simple questions, with cross checking where possible.
In the latter part of the article, he talks about his experiences
water divining in the drier parts of Portugal.
His method of water divining differs from the previous
posts. He starts with a map dowse using a pendulum. He then programs his mind
to look for water no deeper than some pre-set depth. To provide some guarantee
of a good water supply, he searches for streams crossing each other at
different depths. Then for each stream, he deduces its depth and the different strata
between it and the surface, since this will affect the ease or otherwise of the
drilling. Then the rate of flow and water purity, with reference to trace
elements, since customers might require this knowledge. The likely positions must
be referenced to the actual geography, as shown on the map, to check for access
to the site, and to establish that if a bore hole was sunk, that it does not
rob a neighbour of their water supply.
Next, he goes on site with a whalebone dowsing rod (a springy
type of rod) and he goes about double checking the results of the map dowsing. On site he surveys the strata below. He finds
the crossing point if the two streams. Separately analysing each stream for
depth and flow rate. For depthing he uses a purely mental approach, in which he
counts down in feet from the surface until he gets a reaction. For flow rate,
he stands over the stream and rotates himself through 360 degrees, until he
gets a reaction, each rotation being so many gallons per hour. He has to correct depth estimates and flow estimates
based on his analysis of the strata.
He uses a particularly interesting (and probably individualistic)
method to determine whether there are any more flows, flowing into the crossing
point. This involves inserting an iron rod over the stream reactions to cancel
out the previous reactions. There is a similarity here to the Cryke depthing method
described in the last post. It is as if the dowser can program their dowsing reactions
through mental intent.
However, there are two confounding issues (dowsing traps) affecting
his dowsing and other aspects of the search, a dry aquifer, or “Spook” and a “Shadow”
(or imaginary image) of the real stream, or aquifer. But he describes techniques
he uses to identify these.
He does not go into much detail about determining the purity
of the water, but my guess is that he uses a “Mager colour wheel”, simply a
card with a palette of differing colours around the circumference, then using each
colour as a sample of the purity of the water, e.g. black might mean brackish
water, and light blue might mean drinkable.
All in all, his technique is very thorough to avoid
mistakes, which though potentially quite an exhausting process, is one which he
found gave its just rewards.
Following on from the last post which was an introduction to some of the basics of water divining, here is an account from the BSD journal of 1959, from a water diviner named A.C. Wiliamson. This article begins with a helpful description of the geology of underground water. He then describes his own survey technique, again, using a Y rod, very common at that time. He refers to many “dowsing zones” on each side of the underground flow and how these may trick un unwary dowser. He provides a diagram showing two of these zones which give a reaction, two on each side of the stream. This appears to have some similarity to the reactions described by Applegate, but not exactly the same. Also, Williamson does not speak of the “trios”. He then goes on to explain how to distinguish between the various reactions.
For finding the depth of the stream, he mentions the Bishop’s rule in a similar manner to Applegate, but says that when there is a variety of different strata present, and particularly clay, this rule is not reliable. Instead, he uses a method common at the time, devised by a Major Creyke, in which a mumetal rod is inserted directly above the underground stream. Remarkably, this had the effect of creating a number of concentric rings, of different radii, on the surface of the ground, such that when the dowser walked over the ring, they would feel a reaction. The distance of the reaction from the rod, then gave a measure of the depths of the top and bottom of the water bearing strata.
(There is a mention here of someone named Maby. He was a
scientist, who had taken it upon himself to investigate the physical principles
underlying dowsing. This he did from his dowsing laboratory in the Cotswolds,
with some financial support from the BSD. He was very much a scientist of his day, in that
his explanations where based on physical principles, as we see in this article.
To begin with he was much admired for his work and he seemed to provide some helpful
advice for field dowsing, and he certainly wrote of some interesting experiments
in the BSD journal, which we might cover in later posts. But as time
progressed, I feel that his work did fall out of favour amongst many members of
the BSD.)
For an estimation of the flow rate of water, Williamson uses comparison method, whereby he compares the positions of the first reaction bands he encounters, when walking away from the stream, with those obtained over known flows in a similar geology, ie a kind of lookup table approach. It shows the importance of a knowledge of local geology when water divining.
About water quality, he mentions that some dowsers can
deduce it, but he remains sceptical.
He concludes by mentioning how secretive, or vague, water diviners can be about their practice. But even if they divulged all, it is apparent that many differences would exist between their different methods, even though they might all converge on the same result. This is a particularly intriguing aspect of dowsing, I think.
When one mentions dowsing to the uninitiated, there might be
blank looks, until you explain that water divining is one application of the
art. Most folk seem to be aware of this mysterious ability to locate
underground water, often with little more than a forked twig. This is what
dowsing is to many people. However ironically, I would suggest, not to the
majority of modern-day dowsers. In the UK, although there are many folk who
practice dowsing, very few indeed are professional water diviners.
But what most people do not realise is the process a dowser
goes through to perform the search. Here I wanted to post a description of a method
used by a successful water diviner, named George Applegate, who during his life,
was very well-known within the dowsing fraternity. He explained his methodology
in his book:
The Complete Guide to Dowsing. The Definitive Guide to Finding Underground Water. Published in 2002 by Vega, London. ISBN 1-84333-115-2.
Here I have taken an extract from the book, simply to
illustrate some of the fundamentals of water divining. I have also added some additional
notes here.
When dowsing for water, in addition to locating where a
subterranean “stream” might reside, such that a borehole might be successfully
sunk, there are several pieces of information that need to be established.
These include the depth of the water, the flow rate of water, ie the volume
that one might expect to obtain in a given amount of time, the direction of
flow and the purity of the water, ie is it OK to drink? So quite a lot of
information to extract.
The article here deals with actually locating the stream. Remember
that this is one dowser’s personal overview, and that another dowser may have
another technique, but the I think that it describes some of the salient
points.
Applegate seemed to be a dowser who worked mainly with the
“rod”, ie the traditional forked stick. (There is a picture of him holding one
such at the article). Therefore, the article refers to use of the Y rod when
locating water. However, as he points out, other dowsing devices can be used,
each producing a reaction based on its design. Perhaps a more common one
now-days are angle rods. With these, the dipping action of a Y rod, would be
replaced by a rotation of the rods, either inwards so that they cross, or even
outwards, so that the rods point in opposite directions.
He starts with what he terms “distant dowsing”. Here he asks
in what direction a suitable source of water lies. His basic method is to turn
through 360 degrees, rather like a “radar”, as he puts it, hoping to get a
reaction in the rod during this circuit. He then walks in the direction of the
reaction. Note he could also have done this on a map of the site, but he seemed
to prefer being onsite.
The very interesting fact about subterranean water is that
it not only creates a reaction in the dowser, when they stand immediately above
it, but also at several other points, on each side of the underground stream. These
are the “reaction bands” which he talks about. Unless a dowser is aware of
their existence, they will most likely be misled and think they have found
water, but in totally the wrong place!
So as the dowser walks towards the stream, they will feel a
number of reactions in their dowsing device, with the strongest of these being
over the stream itself. They might mark each of these reactions. It is then
important to repeat the process from the other side of the stream, as a confirmation
of the first pass.
When above the stream, he uses the rotation method again, this
time though only through 180 degrees, searching for “two fan-wise reactions”,
ie two reactions which are separated by approximately 180, indicating the line
of the stream.
There is the interesting phenomenon of “trios”. So, the reaction
over the stream band itself is made up of three reactions, with the central one
indicating the centre of the stream. Then as one moves away from the stream,
another trio of reactions occurs, which are sometimes referred to as the “depthing”
or “flow” bands. The central reaction of these three is particularly helpful, since
it may be used to estimate the depth of the flow, using a method known as the
Bishop’s rule. (Incidentally, the origin of this rule and its name remain unknown,
but it was known of in the late 18th century. However even in the mid-20th
century, many water diviners did not use this method, but instead used methods
of their own devising. I will cover some of these methods in later posts).
It is important that the dowser identifies the centre of the
stream very accurately, so that when a bore hole is sunk, it does not miss the
flow. And of course, a good estimate of the depth is necessary to understand
how deep to drill and whether this is actually cost effective. Estimating the
depth can be a very tricky business, and what is not stressed in the extract,
is that a successful water diviner will also often draw on their knowledge of
local geology. Also, the scenario
described is a simplified one. In practice there may be many confounding
issues, for example when more than one steam close together, and for many
dowsers, if clay is present between the water and the surface, this can prove a
big problem for depth estimation.
Finally, how dowsers discover the remaining information,
such as quantity and quality of the underground water, I will deal with in
later posts.
To further illustrate the work of a water diviner in action,
I have also included another extract from the 1937 Journal of the British
Society of Dowsers (BSD). This is the account of a lecture given by a Major
K.W. Merrylees, a water diviner working in India.
There are some differences between his and George Applegate’s
accounts. He also uses the three sets of “trios” to locate the underground
stream and to estimate its depth, but he has developed his own method of
distinguishing which trio overlies the stream itself. Merrylees notes that the
reaction of his rod is different from that of his dowser colleague. Finally, He
doesn’t trust wholly the Bishop’s rule, based on the outer trios, and allows some
margin for his depth estimation.
The article is found here, it is entitled “Water divining on the north west frontier”
In one BSD journal (no 208), the Editor made the remark that
more communications were coming to them in which it was said that ‘I have
proved it by dowsing’. The Editor added that “Dowsing on its own is no proof –
we must have more evidence than this.”
This theme was picked up later by two experienced dowsers, in a short correspondence to the journal. I think they make important contributions. The first is from Mike Doney.
Many Dowsers have leaned that experience is enough proof
itself. But he asserts that dowsing successes are not proof, and is sympathetic
to the Editor of the BSD journal, for their efforts to exert some restraint on the
claims of contributors.
As an illustration of a dowsing “belief”, he sets out a “nutty”
challenge to others, to confirm an idea of his own, or whether it was all in
his imagination; that calcium somehow flows through channels, nine feet apart.
The respondent, Dan Wilson, provides a considered and particularly interesting response to Mike’s challenge.
He asserts that the dowsing response is a reaction to artefacts created subconsciously within the Dowser’s mind. These artefacts are created in response to the latter’s speculations. His writing is a little difficult to follow in parts, but what he suggests, is that the Dowser’s mind can create different “realities”. The real question, he suggests, is whether these are helpful. This is why proof is important. He argues that the calcium channels referred to by Mike are real but are not particularly helpful. Instead, he suggests, searching for ‘islands’ of Calcium would be more helpful. In so doing the islands, which did not previously exist, would come into existence.
But the key point is not the Calcium, it is that the Dowser’s
mind is creating reality through their intention. He has come to this conclusion
through his dowsing practice. But interestingly, parapsychological research has
also shown intention to be fundamental to reality.
An important topic for Dowsers are so-called “Earth energy lines”, which we shall cover in future posts. The ideas in this correspondence, I believe, have a great bearing on these.
This extract is from a more recent BSD journal (1991). It is
the content of a lecture delivered by a former president of the British Society
of Dowsers, Major-General J. Scot-Elliott. He came to practice dowsing later in
life and specialised in archaeological dowsing. He authored a helpful book, “Dowsing:
One Man’s Way”, published in 1977. (It might still be available from the BSD
shop, https://britishdowsers.org/ )
In his lecture, you can see how the explanation of the
dowsing effect has moved from the idea of a mental radio (objects giving off
emanations), to the realisation that it is a matter of mind. Interestingly
though he suggests that the ability may not be evenly distributed throughout
the population, with only 10% having the ability to become “good” dowsers. But
the key he asserts is to find an application for one’s dowsing and concentrate
on that, rather than apply dowsing to everything and then practice with that
application. Early work needs to include good feedback, to build confidence. Expecting
novice dowsers to perform well is not justified, and this has implications when
one considers past experiments designed to prove the credibility of dowsing.
As in the post of 26/03/2020, he believes it is necessary to
keep the process of dowsing as simple as one can. Avoid preconceptions as much
as possible (in the dowsing field these are sometimes referred to as
shibboleths). He mentions that samples are only an aid to focus the mind, they
may be helpful sometimes, but just a written description of the object sought
may also be sufficient.
He ends with a helpful description of his way of working and
also some basic rules for beginners. Dowsing is the art of seeking, and for
this to be successful, one requires practice with feedback, in order to develop
confidence and identify confounding factors. But he also stresses that “the
need to know” is important, ie the results are improved, if the search is
personally important to the dowser. And of course, the question the dowser asks
themselves in their search must be the correct one (otherwise, garbage in,
garbage out) and interestingly, it often should account for time, because of
the rémanence effect.
The article is entitled “Dowsing for beginners”, see:
During the 20th century, the idea of dowsing over
maps began to slowly catch on, although not all dowsers considered it possible.
Here Evelyn Penrose, a remarkably talented dowser who we have met in an earlier
post, writes about a surprise she had while map dowsing for water in Australia.
She had previously map dowsed on many occasions, but as is often the case in
dowsing, the practitioner will often discover something new about their art.
She had always considered, that it essential that the map
she was using, should have sufficient detail of the actual land it represented,
so that it could not be confused with another similar area of land. That is the
map acted rather like a finger print. It is a method very much in keeping with
the vogue at that time to use a sample of the object sought, when dowsing. The
idea being that somehow, the dowser and sample worked together. However, on one
occasion, much to her surprise, she discovered that she had successfully dowsed
for underground water, using a map that represented not the actual layout, but the
future layout of the land.
It is as if the real dowsing was purely mental, with the map
only acting as mental prop, to help focus it and thereby shut out all
distractions.
This article, another from the very early editions of the
BSD journals (in this case 1939), is written by a very experienced dowser,
writing under a pseudonym. His tackles one the most important aspects of
dowsing, that of having preconceived ideas, which will affect the dowsing
response.
He gives an example. Traditionally, dowsing had been more of
a country man pursuit and he talks of the “old village dowser”. However, new
people, with new ideas were now beginning to take up the practice, such as our
author. In his example, it is likely that the country dowser considered the
dowsing reaction to be caused, at least in some part, by a flow of electricity
through the body in/out of the ground, therefore the wearing of rubber soled boots
would insulate one and prevent any dowsing. To our author, this was simply an incorrect
pre-conceived idea. The country dowser was inhibiting his own ability to dowse.
But by using his fake instrument, to fabricate a supposed dowsing response, the
author was able to remove the dowser’s inhibition.
He states quite clearly his experience, “… if one’s
instruments, and oneself, are sensitive enough, nothing will stop radiation perception”,
and there was nothing he could not dowse for. (In fact, from today’s perspective, you might
even say that perceiving radiation, was also a preconceived idea, but perhaps
one that had little effect on one’s abilities to dowse). He says that it is necessary
to achieve the right mental state, “… chloroform your imagination …”, but the
hardest part, he stresses, is understanding (“translating”) the meaning of the
dowsing response.
Here is an example of an application of dowsing – sexing
hen’s eggs. Possibly unsexy to many, the accounts are still interesting, for
the way they illustrate real dowsing problems, the pitfalls and discoveries
along the way. This is presumably why many dowsers have often limited their application
of dowsing, to only a certain range of problems.
I have included two articles from 1940s editions of the BSD
journal. The 1945 article is a dowser’s experiences working out how to sex eggs
reliably. The author refers to dowsing as “radio perception”, a common idea at
that time, being that dowsing was a person’s ability to act as some kind of
radio receiver. (In fact, the BSD journal was renamed “Radio Perception” for
several years).
The article is a little difficult to follow at times, as she
recounts several unexpected discoveries along the way, but here are the main
points. She found that pendulums comprising different materials gave different
levels of reliability, up to a maximum of 80%. However, when she used a silver
chain as a pendulum, an item which she wore regularly, she achieved a reliability
of 100%. As she put it, this might have had something to do with the pendulum
being more “attuned” to her. She made the
further discovery that there were four types of response when sexing an egg:
male, female, infertile, or fertile, but the chick would not live long.
Interestingly, the strength of the dowsing reaction was dependent on the
vitality of the egg, such that it became possible to predict which eggs were
worth incubating. Finally, and importantly, through careful breeding, she was
able to test and successfully confirm to herself her dowsing ability.
The 1943 article is a short letter to the BSD journal, from
another dowser, illustrating their attempts to sex eggs. Here they provide
actual figures, although the numbers are too small to be statistically
meaningful, but still they might be indicative of a relatively high confidence
level. What is particularly interesting I think, is the is that one egg had
become coated in the remains of a broken egg, with the effect of masking the
underlying fertile egg from the dowser’s search. An unexpected phenomenon
indeed. Again, this shows the care required when dowsing. But with experience
of dowsing for given types objects, suitable questions can be established to
deal with such eventualities. Another
reason why a dowser might specialise in the way they apply their art.
This article is from a later edition (1980) of the BSD
journal compared with the previous posts so far. Therefore, the author has been
able to use previously reported dowsing methods. As a result, he has come to
some interesting conclusions as to the nature of dowsing.
He states that he uses the minimum of dowsing tools, namely
a V rod (that is a dowsing tool made from two flexible arms joined at one end),
and a pendulum. He does not use L rods (two pieces of wire, with a 90-degree bend
to form handles), which are more commonly used by dowsers today. He points out
that it is not the tool that responds to the sought object, but the dowser
themselves, and demonstrates this by saying he has successfully dowsed using
his hands alone (a practice often referred to now as deviceless dowsing).
He rejects the notion that the dowser is picking up anything
emanating from the object sought (as we referred to in post of 13-03-2020) an
idea widely accepted by dowsers. He justifies this my pointing out that he did most
of his dowsing far removed from the actual site. To achieve this, he has
successfully used map dowsing, proxy dowsing (with, in one case, only in
contact with the proxy by telephone, some 15 miles away) and finally what he
terms “mental dowsing”. In the latter, he pictures the site in his mind and
dowses it that way.
Finally, he finishes on the possibilities such techniques might offer more traditional prospecting companies.
Within the BSD Journal, there are a few reports of what has
been referred to as proxy dowsing. Here another person (a non-dowser) walks
over the site to be dowsed, while not performing any dowsing action, while the actual
dowser, stationary and at some distance removed, watches their movement. In
this manner, the dowser can still obtain a reaction on their dowsing device, as
if they were walking the site in the manner of their proxy.
This curious phenomenon can surprise even seasoned dowsers. In this article, written by Evelyn Penrose, (probably the most accomplished female dowser of the last century) experiences proxy dowsing for the first time. She is introduced to it by one of the great 20th Century dowsing pioneers, the French priest, Abbe Bouly (there were several French priests who were expert dowsers at this time).
Proxy dowsing is reminiscent of the Stanford Research
Institute experiments in remote viewing, in which a target person visits a
remote site and the remote viewer attempts to describe what the target person is
looking at. Therefore, one might conclude that the basic mechanism is the same
in both these applications of psi.
During the earlier years of its existence, each Journal of
the British Society of Dowsers contained brief reviews of European dowsing
journals. One of these was the French dowsing journal named Radiesthesie pour Tous, now sadly a
publication no more. These reviews were brief, but they included translations
into English. The content of these
European journals, and particularly this one, were very interesting. One gets
the impression that the French dowsers were more open minded than their English
counterparts at this time, with regard to how dowsing might work and how it
might be applied.
Anyway, here is a short extract from Radiesthesie pour Tous, Number 21, August 1951, p263, entitled “Errors in Radiesthesia”. There are two
short accounts of dowsers performing a successful search, but which turned out
to be failures, in very unexpected manners.
The first search was for a lost dog, but actually the dog’s brother was found.
In the second search, the dowser sought a husband and wife,
with whom contact had been lost at the start of WW2. In fact, the couple had
been killed, and instead he located their son in one location, and a relative
in another.
Such failures show the importance of the dowser asking the
right questions, or series of questions, about the object(s) sought during the
search process.
The translated text is available here (look for p.263):
This article, published in 1951 in the Journal of the BSD,
is a description of a Dr Robertson, who evidently was a very good practitioner
of the art of dowsing.
He seemed to specialise in water divining and the article
describes him dowsing onsite for water in India. However, he had the ability to
dowse, in a very precise manner, for any object. To do this, he followed a particularly
interesting technique. He used a traditional Y shared dowsing rod, “.. afresh
forked and pliable twig ..”. He would hold the two ends of the Y in his hands,
and then touch the third length onto either the object, or example of the same,
that he was seeking. What we have here appears to be a kind of programming of
the search. It’s interesting that the author could also use this technique,
suggesting it is not necessarily dependent on the dowser. However, in the last
post, we saw the dowser holding a sample (a slipper in that case) whilst
dowsing. One possible explanation is that this procedure somehow programmed the
intention to find the object within the mind of the dowser. Using this technique, an example is given, of
the ability of a dowser to trace the path, previously trod by a person (like we
saw in the previous post – “Tracing the lost” – 13/3/2020).
The author says that the “waves” of the object then entered the stick. That is his own explanation, but as pointed out in previous posts, the dowsing effect has been thought of as a kind of radio reception. He even talks of something “vibrating” the stick. But this is probably best thought of as an analogy. It seems that it was the author’s experience that not everyone can obtain a dowsing reaction (something we will hopefully return to in later posts). Then there was the curious observation that when the author attempted to use Dr Robertson’s dowsing rod (“stick”), he was unable to, for it seemed that the rod had somehow rather bizarrely become entangled with Robertson’s.
One historical application of dowsing has been to trace missing people, either alive or deceased. In this account, taken from the BSD Journal of September 1950, we find the police working with a dowser in an attempt to find a missing young girl, who it turned out sadly had been murdered.
Although the girl was eventually located by other means, the account is an interesting study in actual dowsing. There are many accounts in which dowsers have successfully traced people. This is probably because it appears to be quite a specialised task and only a handful of dowsers specialised in it, but as a result they became very good. But dowsing is not always exact, because there are often confounding issues, however it may be a helpful guide.
The first part of this very detailed account is provided by the
Police inspector who worked with the dowser, a Mr Latham, and the latter part contains
the comments of the dowser himself.
The dowser begins the search by dowsing a large scale map using
a pendulum. He describes the action of
the latter as he closes in on the area in which the girl was later found. Changes in the pendulum’s swing from oscillation to and fro to gyration is a common
dowsing reaction, but the meaning of the
swing may often depends on the dowser themselves.
He later moves to on-site dowsing, using a traditional (and
at that time widely used) Y shaped dowsing rod, here made of whalebone, which
was a material of choice at this time. I think few dowsers today would use the
Y rod. He is feeling the “pull” in the
rod, to get a bearing on the location of child.
Note also that he speaks of “emanations”. Dowsers, especially
at that time, but also today, consider that everything radiates in some way,
and that they are receiving and homing in on this radiation or emanations. If
we stay with that metaphor, then to help him “tune” himself into what he is
seeking, he uses a “sample” representing whatever is sought. In this case, it
is the child’s slipper. As he points out, an inanimate object can become imbued
with the characteristics of the thing sought, if the two are connected for a sufficient
amount of time (often referred to by dowsers as rémanence). Interestingly
though he mentions the child’s hair and dog’s hair within the slipper, the former
should have aided the search, while the latter may have been sufficient to confuse
the search.
Dowsers often give vent to their own ideas about how their art works and he expounds on this at some length near the end, hopefully this does not distract from the actual proceedings.
Welcome to this new dowsing blog, I hope you find it of
interest.
For the first post, I want to mention the British Society of
Dowsers (BSD), see https://britishdowsers.org/
This organisation was established in 1933, by Colonel A. H. Bell.
The early years of the society’s existence attracted several former officers of
the British army, who either had, or presumably had, personal experience of the
efficacy of dowsing, as practiced by those they commanded.
Since its inception, the society has published a quarterly journal.
This began as “The Journal of the British Society of Dowsers”, then for a brief
period it became “Radio Perception”, before reverting to its original title,
and finally in 2000 it was renamed “Dowsing Today”. Throughout its history, the
journal has contained accounts by members of their various dowsing experiences
and experiments. It is a rich source of information relating to how dowsing has
been and is practiced.
Because of that, I will be drawing heavily on content derived
from the BSD journals. Digital versions of the journals are not currently
publicly available, so currently this blog is the only place where this material
may be read online. But rather then full volumes, I will post individual
articles of what I consider are of particular interest.
Today I have posted the editorial from issue number 1 of the
BSD journal, 1933. Though short, it is a good introduction to some of the key
aspects of dowsing.
Reference is made to the various tools that a dowser might
use, while practicing their art. It also mentions that although dowsing might
be more familiar as water divining, there are many more applications of which
many people remain unaware. So for example, in addition to being able to locate
items underground, dowsing can be used for medical diagnosis. The example of tracing lost people is also
referred to. There is a curious reference to an object having a “scent”, that
is leaving some invisible trace behind once the object has been moved. This is
what dowsers often refer to as remanence, and from the dowser’s point of view,
it is as if the object is still in situ. Obviously, this can cause problems for
while dowsing.
The dowsing mechanism might be thought of as being a
physical effect. But dowsers can search by dowsing maps of some distant
location of interest. So there appears to be some anomalous method of
information transfer at work.
I hope to provide further illustration of these points at a
later time.