• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Looking for statistics help

Great work! I'm glad you are still friends. I hope he does test other friends. Did this just happen? It often takes a little while after a failed test for the claimant to figure out what went wrong. Maybe he will figure out what he thinks happened and you can rerun the test with the fixes he thinks will help.

Keep us updated.

Congrats again,
Ward
 
Thanks for this forum - it's been a great help. Yes, we did the test today. My friend did mention that he has dowsed the area we used many times with no hits (it is in his backyard) and today found an odd partial hit beyond the area we used - not sure what that might mean - but it did not impact our test (he agreed to that). We could, of course, repeat the test or he could repeat it privately with his wife (he has the protocol, of course.)

From my experience, many people are affronted when a test is suggested, so the fact he was interested in doing a test is a good sign. He may decide he did something wrong, or he may decide dowsing isn't exactly what it is claimed to be. But I expect it takes time to assimilate a new idea.
 
Also, how did it go with the open test when he knew where the target was? It's also interesting to note that the chances of him getting the results he did were about equal to him getting no hits whatsoever. Since you started here looking for help with statistics, it's important to remember that how the stats are interpreted and presented is ultimately just as important as the actual math.

Ward
 
If he has not seen the video of James Randi testing the Australian dowsers (there's a link on page one of this thread), he should. It's a much more elaborate test than you did (they had a TV network paying for it), but the results were the same. It might help him as he considers what might be a better protocol (for him) for a future test.

Ward
 
"how did it go with the open test when he knew where the target was?"

We did that test - perfect detection. He was so confident that we only did it with the water bottle under bucket #3. I was prepared to try with the water under each bucket in turn. He carefully walked up to each bucket - not a quiver from the rods except a quick full cross at #3. So entirely successful.
 
That's a good idea - it also shows that even "professional" dowsers fare no better, so no reason to feel sheepish.
 
"it's important to remember that how the stats are interpreted and presented is ultimately just as important as the actual math."

So true - I once worked on air pollution control equipment in refineries and we had to analyze data to show how well things worked. My boss said, the more elegant and complex the statistics the less anyone believes them.
 
Kate Rauner said:
That's a good idea - it also shows that even "professional" dowsers fare no better, so no reason to feel sheepish.
Click to expand...

If he can take it in that spirit it may be a good idea. You don't want to pile on him personally or his ideas. But he seems like a smart guy and you must have some knack for not making him feel threatened, so try what you think may help him.

You won't rid the world of superstition, but if you can help a friend before they get too deep that is a huge win. Especially if you don't lose the friend in the process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom