I don't believe in dowsing, I have seen it done exactly once, and then a farm dam was dug with an underground spring directly in the centre of it, so my observations show it to have a 100% success rate from a sample size of 1, which is a bit awkward.
I can see a little grain of truth in finding depressions and soft ground as the dowser shifts their body to stand level, which may indicate geological features associated with ground water.
Humans also have a really good sense of smell for petrichor, which might also be related to ground water, with dowsing just being useful to focus on suble things like smell.
Anyone who thinks dowsing can detect water directly is clueless or lying though, and dowsing has absolutely been used as a grift before.
i have a much more expedient method called "stick a very long hygrometer into the dirt every hundred meters in a grid, and move towards increasing moisture"
21 Comments
chiliedogg@lemmy.world · 65 pts · 297d
Reminds me of this:
Agent641@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 296d
I don't believe in dowsing, I have seen it done exactly once, and then a farm dam was dug with an underground spring directly in the centre of it, so my observations show it to have a 100% success rate from a sample size of 1, which is a bit awkward.
olafurp@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 296d
Wikipedia agrees with you. Commonly viewed as a psuodoscience. The equipment is very good at amplifying subtle hand movements.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowsing?wprov=sfla1
Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 296d
I can see a little grain of truth in finding depressions and soft ground as the dowser shifts their body to stand level, which may indicate geological features associated with ground water.
Humans also have a really good sense of smell for petrichor, which might also be related to ground water, with dowsing just being useful to focus on suble things like smell.
Anyone who thinks dowsing can detect water directly is clueless or lying though, and dowsing has absolutely been used as a grift before.
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 288d
i have a much more expedient method called "stick a very long hygrometer into the dirt every hundred meters in a grid, and move towards increasing moisture"
FinjaminPoach@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 297d
Uhhh is xkcd comics a geotechnical engineer??? Or a geologist?? This feels like an illegal loredrop
EDIT: fixed xbcd to xkcd
Zwiebel@feddit.org · 20 pts · 297d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randall_Munroe
floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 296d
He's a professional geek
Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 296d
Randall does have a lot of geology humor specifically. I wouldn't be surprised if he knows a few geologist.
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works · 16 pts · 297d
The /// parts are carrying a lot of weight in this one.
kilgore_trout@feddit.it · 14 pts · 297d
Please link to the source.
unlawfulbooger@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 21 pts · 296d
Apparently it’s xkcd 3171
Randelung@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 296d
*Diorite*: Wait, is that a Mi
*Netherrack*: Ah.
Live_your_lives@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 296d
In case you didn't know, diorite is a real type rock as well that is similar to granite.
Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net · 12 pts · 297d
I'm irrationality angry about the term 'bottom soil' and that it's below granite
edgemaster72@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 297d
Bottom soil: Is in the middle of the soils
Top soil #2: on the bottom
sbeak@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 296d
The earth is round, so bottom is actually top. Middle is deep inside the earth ("bottom")
VM_Abrantes@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 296d
While I appreciate the Nutty Putty Cave Incident callback, at what layer is the shark eating fiber optic cable?
Soup@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 296d
The one where the first several hundred metres is just water.
Fmstrat@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 296d
Was waiting for Saddam.
fossilesque@mander.xyz · 3 pts · 296d
Jax@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 297d
Isn't water divining pseudoscience? I get that isn't the point of the post, but I always thought it was bullshit.
Edit: should have responded to the comment about water divining, whoops.