Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | paul.courtney2 |
Date: | Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:38:56 +0000 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
My old prof - the late RJC Atkinson of Stonehenge fame, who I think was the
first archaeologist to use resistivity surveying, believed in dowsing.
However, the only exponents I have ever met were total loonies. There is
also a book called Church Archaeology and Dowsing by R.N. Bailey- but I
haven't read it.
----- Original Message -----
From: "ned heite" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 12:21 PM
Subject: Dowsing
> Rich Green wrote:
>
> >There is no technology in dowsing. It is little more than redneck
> >voodoo. Hume also suggested that coat hangers were a better choice than
> >metal detectors. I doubt if anyone gives much credence to that
> >assertion.
> >
> >Surely, you're not asking a serious question with regard to dowsing?
>
>
> Yes, I am asking a serious question.
>
> Mr. Noel Hume is not the only reliable authority to mention dowsing
> as a potentially serious technology. Even if the suggestion had come
> from a lesser figure, serious suggestions deserve to be honored.
>
> I don't know why it works, how it works, or even if it works. I
> merely asked if anyone has given it an open-minded test. We're in
> pretty bad shape if we can dismiss ideas as "redneck voodoo" without
> reasonable test and review.
>
> So, please, does anyone have serious answers?
>
>
> --
> *****[log in to unmask]******
> * *
> * Compost is nature's *
> * way of thanking us *
> * for not trashing *
> * the world with more *
> * unnecessary and *
> * worthless landfills.*
> * --Thanks very mulch *
> ************************
>
|
|
|