Ley Lines

[Sharon Hill]

What utter bobbins.

Good reply since I clearly was not going to waste my time trying to respond to all that stuff. I wish I was European. [Funny tangent: At trivia night (what British would call a "pub quiz"), I had a puzzle to match the British slang sayings with their U.S. "translation". I got all of them correct while my teammates would have gotten about 3 out of 11. I credit Fortean Times and a lifetime of watching British comedy shows.]

 

[Frideswide]

Wonderful, thanks @Mungoman

absolutely!

wonderful response @Mungoman !

 

[Carl Grove]

While I can't have access to and read everything, I have found the much notable information on dowsing from multiple sides but especially in terms of American "water witching". And, as I mentioned, I worked as a hydrogeologist and have seen no professionals use dowsers. I am very familiar with the history of Watkins' ley lines and Spooky Archaeology as well as spooky geology. So I don't think much about paranormal commenters who go on and on about what "science" rejects due to prejudice or whatever assumption, and what I "obviously" haven't read. That's a cheap basis to support a claim and sounds like a cop-out to me. But I do admit I should by now know better than to try to discuss things with people whose proud point is "science doesn't know everything". Extraordinary claims tend to fall apart rather easily when even lightly scrutinized. I'll stick to my informed opinion until some well-established evidence comes along to change that.

Well, you haven't actually addressed any of the points I raised, which are all fairly specific, and which I would have thought were fairly easy to check up on and if possible dismiss. If you don't want to do that there is indeed no point in your continuing to discuss it. I don't think anybody would actually claim that science already knows everything -- if that was the case, there would be no point in trying to investigate anything.

 

[Lb8535]

I have a great respect for science and none for claims with no standard rigorous proof. But I do have to say that after a local dowser with a reputation for success (the well guy referred me to him) accurately found water for me on a plot of land I am assuming there's something in it if someone wants to bother to run appropriate tests. I wold not hesitate to hire one again.

 

[Mungoman]

Wonderful, thanks @Mungoman

No worries Coal

 

[Mungoman]

absolutely!

wonderful response @Mungoman !

It was my pleasure Frides.

 

[Mungoman]

We use Dowsers out here - we know it's there, water, that is, with the great artesian bore, and what with the buckling of the geological strata it does rise at points, but that is still to deep.

We can sort of read the lay of the land by what grows where, but we want water that is close to the surface, and we want a predictable amount, so for that we'd head off up the pub and have a chat with the local fella...or fellarina.

The problem with our deep water is that it's hot, and full of chemical.

We want to tap into a local recharge, into it's midstream and usually the local dowsers are spot on.

I'll accept both the geological science, and the bloke who's got a couple of bent 3.5mm welding rods personally.

 

[Mikefule]

I'll accept both the geological science, and the bloke who's got a couple of bent 3.5mm welding rods personally.

I've heard enough first hand stories (that is, been told by people who witnessed it themselves) to accept the possibility that dowsing for water may work.

Whether it is the dowser picking up some emanation from the water, or simply an ideomotor response to their intuition about where water is likely to be is a separate question. My dad believed he could dowse to find the run of concealed drains, but he was a builder for 50 years, so he probably had a fairly good idea where the drains were likely to be.

However, it is a huge step from accepting that (some) people can successfully dowse for underground water — a substance which is known to be essential to life, and which is often associated with visible surface features — to accepting that this in turn validates a belief that some people can dowse for an unspecified form of Earth energy which cannot be detected by other means.

 

[Carl Grove]

I've heard enough first hand stories (that is, been told by people who witnessed it themselves) to accept the possibility that dowsing for water may work.

Whether it is the dowser picking up some emanation from the water, or simply an ideomotor response to their intuition about where water is likely to be is a separate question. My dad believed he could dowse to find the run of concealed drains, but he was a builder for 50 years, so he probably had a fairly good idea where the drains were likely to be.

However, it is a huge step from accepting that (some) people can successfully dowse for underground water — a substance which is known to be essential to life, and which is often associated with visible surface features — to accepting that this in turn validates a belief that some people can dowse for an unspecified form of Earth energy which cannot be detected by other means.

Just to make it plain, Reddish was not saying that dowsing for water was not using the same energy as dowsing for linear objects. It would make the situation all too complex if two different forces were involved. However, because water is said to absorb and re-radiate torsion it would obviously (perhaps!) make water the easiest thing to detect. Obviously we need to follow up Reddish's research and expand it to get more detail. But dowsing has traditionally been used for detecting underground structures of all kinds, not just geological strata --- for example, construction engineers used to use it to detect possible obstructions that might complicate or prevent building operations. The London Electricity Board used to issue its inspectors with dowsing rods as standard equipment, which came in very handy during the blitz when bombing had destroyed all landmarks and detecting and repairing electricity mains was a vital job.
By the way, it was when Reddish's drain got blocked and he was trying to find its location in his yard that a neighbour helpfully located it with a pair of rods in short order. When he asked how it worked, the neighbour replied, "But you're a scientist -- don't you know?" And that spurred him to do the research!

 

[Coal]

Good reply since I clearly was not going to waste my time trying to respond to all that stuff. I wish I was European. [Funny tangent: At trivia night (what British would call a "pub quiz"), I had a puzzle to match the British slang sayings with their U.S. "translation". I got all of them correct while my teammates would have gotten about 3 out of 11. I credit Fortean Times and a lifetime of watching British comedy shows.]

I think you're on the right track with a social explanation for this kind of dogged avoidance of reality. It's as if there is a social representation of ley-lines (a stock of values, ideas, metaphors, beliefs, and practices that are shared among the members of groups and communities ), which is mistaken by some as meaning ley-lines are a real empirical thing.

Once one incorporates a social representation and it's corresponding social identity into one's self identity, it's dogged hard to change. The mental manoeuvres the 'believers' use to avoid empirical evidence (or lack of it) are very characteristic of people avoiding something which challenges their view of themselves. So if science contradicts self-identity, science must be 'a conspiracy' or 'conventional science' (viz. 'not science') or a 'white patriarchy'. This kind of thinking is the very root of a closed mind is it not?

 

[Sharon Hill]

Everyone has heard "stories". Everyone seemingly has seen with their own eyes. But WHY can't it successfully be tested? Why are dowsers not reliable when tested? The same applies to psychics in my opinion. When they are called to perform, they often fail. I know, I know... the skeptics or the pressure ruin it but that is really a cop-out. There is better documentation for other unusual human senses such as supertasting, synesthesia, and those with extraordinary memory skills. Why has this "talent" not been objectively established?

 

[Mungoman]

Everyone has heard "stories". Everyone seemingly has seen with their own eyes. But WHY can't it successfully be tested? Why are dowsers not reliable when tested? The same applies to psychics in my opinion. When they are called to perform, they often fail. I know, I know... the skeptics or the pressure ruin it but that is really a cop-out. There is better documentation for other unusual human senses such as supertasting, synesthesia, and those with extraordinary memory skills. Why has this "talent" not been objectively established?

G'day Sharon, Good question, and like many things, I reckon we've just got to accept things the way they are, until we can detect whatever it is.

We're talking about some one walking around the bush with a withy wand or something similar, who reckons that they, or their wand, is being affected by something that could be 70 feet underground.

Personally, if this phenomena is happening consistently, then it is established that with some people, it can be done - if people demand further proof, then surely it is up to the inquisitor to come up with the telemetry - otherwise it's like that social media trope of, 'Pictures, or it didn't happen' - which is so 2000.

 

[Tempest63]

Living in Witham, Essex I was very impressed with this Essex Mystery http://vulpeculox.net/misc/mystery.htm

Now, after reading this thread, it seems it is all an illusion

 

[Naughty_Felid]

Well, i don't know about Iron Age or Lithic Age Europeans, but i have spent a little time with Australian Aborigines, and their reality (the non-city fellas) is very very different to city people.

They know their 'country' by it's character, and have lines of energy which the Old Ones sing to, to preserve the land. They walk this land and greet big old trees as mates (friends) - conversely, they steer away from country that is 'cheeky' (powerful) because only those that are 'knowing' are comfortable (or allowed) there. The Old Ones see water as being mysterious and powerful, and will throw a rock into a pond or waterhole from a distance so as not to startle the water and it's guardian/spirit - They believe that stars sing, and that on a winter's night they sing the loudest. They'll use the knowledge of all of these things to take them where they want to go

Knowing this reality, they still live in the present. our reality, but not completely. My neighbour next door, Lynn, is sitting out in the morning sun. Lynn has solar cells on her roof so she's not being careful with the pennies - even though it's 16c/60f she will sit in the sun - in fact as you go through this little village, you'll see chairs sitting out in the yard for that express purpose - If you ask lynn, why do you sit in the sun when you could be inside with the heater on, or a fire going, she'll say something like 'well, why wouldn't you...', as if it was a silly question. If you ask those that are open, they'll say, because it's good for you, that fella up there is feeding me - but while Lynn is still living her ancesteral reality, she's also skyping with her extended family throughout Australia. Best of both worlds...Eh.

So I reckon that it does us no favours to stand at our place of science and say that because we can't see or hear something, that it won't exist, because to many others it does...or it once did.

I've always instinctively, greeted big trees and animals when encountering them and I'm not particularly a hippy, it's just something I've always done. I have my own names for certain stretches of roads, or lanes, trees and beasts.

Mind you my great great grandmother used to lay people out in her little village so I'm guessing she must have learnt something from her ancestors - so possibly passed something genetically along.

 

[Carl Grove]

Everyone has heard "stories". Everyone seemingly has seen with their own eyes. But WHY can't it successfully be tested? Why are dowsers not reliable when tested? The same applies to psychics in my opinion. When they are called to perform, they often fail. I know, I know... the skeptics or the pressure ruin it but that is really a cop-out. There is better documentation for other unusual human senses such as supertasting, synesthesia, and those with extraordinary memory skills. Why has this "talent" not been objectively established?

The problem is that most of the tests developed in the West to assess dowsing abilities have not used real life situations. As far as I know nobody has used a design where experienced dowsers are told to locate the possible presence of a sustainable water source in an area which has not been previously investigated. In the rare cases where experimenters have used real life situations, usually a water source is known from previous surveys and a double bind design has not been used -- i.e. the experimenters knew but the subjects didn't. Many of the early studies failed to use adequate controls. The great majority of studies have been testing the ability of dowsers to detect various forms of energy, and it seems well established that dowsers are sensitive to very small magnetic fields. Another design fault is to use a large number of subjects, some of whom are not dowsers, or to introduce the requirement for the dowsers to operate in a way that they would not do in the field. It is a complex subject. Some dowsers are better than others, but it is not known why -- maybe they are more sensitive, or perhaps they have a superior ability to interpret the signals that they pick up. There are, however, some indications of physiological correlates. Nobody before Reddish had even considered simply progressing step by step, developing working hypotheses as you go, and treating dowsing as a physical issue rather than a "paranormal" one.

Russian work on dowsing has been more focussed, and biolocation, as it is termed, is pretty well accepted there. One of their ideas that seems relevant to this discussion is that dowsers don't detect static bodies of water, but actually the signals generated by water running through narrow channels and strata -- which is what a dowser is actually usually seeking, a constant flow that can be used as a source.

So I don't think the comparison with "psychics" is quite appropriate. Many people who publicly adopt this label are basically clever frauds, and testing them is bound to be a waste of time. The one person who has consistently performed well even under experimental conditions i,s I think, Matthew Manning. However, insofar as testing is always in some sense an artificial process, and most types of ESP related phenomena occur either randomly or when a genuine need for them is present (e.g. when psychics are helping to solve a crime), positive results require the use of very clever designs, and parapsychologists have only in the last few decades realised this.

 

[Carl Grove]

Living in Witham, Essex I was very impressed with this Essex Mystery http://vulpeculox.net/misc/mystery.htm

Now, after reading this thread, it seems it is all an illusion

Well, now I've seen the information on that site, I wouldn't be too sure. The Templars definitely sited their churches and other buildings in a deliberate way, as we know from their properties in France, and it is know that they had contact with various Middle Eastern organisations such as the Masons or Builders. The Compass is a key symbol in Freemasonry, which ties in. The calculations seem very convincing as they stand, so I don't think it would even be necessary to convert the co-ordinates into Great Circle format.

 

[Frideswide]

Well, now I've seen the information on that site, I wouldn't be too sure. The Templars definitely sited their churches and other buildings in a deliberate way, as we know from their properties in France, and it is know that they had contact with various Middle Eastern organisations such as the Masons or Builders. The Compass is a key symbol in Freemasonry, which ties in. The calculations seem very convincing as they stand, so I don't think it would even be necessary to convert the co-ordinates into Great Circle format.

I'm very interested in your sources for this.

The Masons? do you mean one of the guilds?

 

[Carl Grove]

I'm very interested in your sources for this.

The Masons? do you mean one of the guilds?

I got interested in this via the Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln research on the Priory of Sion. Unfortunately the authors got a lot of disinformation fed to them and ended up promoting their own bloodline of Christ theory. However, they came across a lot of historical info regarding the Templars and the Priory that was very interesting, without themselves seeing the connections. The Templars (whether or not they were the visible arm of the Priory) did contact Middle Eastern esoteric groups, from one of which, the Builders or Masons, they seem to have taken a lot of symbolism and concepts. Henry Lincoln (among others) noticed that many Templar castles, churches and associated buildings in the Rennes-le-Chateau region were sited to produce a pentagonal pattern.
Main sources:
Baigent, Leigh and Lincoln, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, 1982 and also The Messianic Legacy
Henry Lincoln, The Holy Place, 1991, and Key to the Sacred Pattern, 1997.

 

[Mungoman]

I've always instinctively, greeted big trees and animals when encountering them and I'm not particularly a hippy, it's just something I've always done. I have my own names for certain stretches of roads, or lanes, trees and beasts.

Mind you my great great grandmother used to lay people out in her little village so I'm guessing she must have learnt something from her ancestors - so possibly passed something genetically along.

They're living things NF, aren't they - well, that's the way I see it.. And ancestral gifting...or genetic inheritance - I'm all for that (we see it too often in children where they exhibit a mannerism that you've seen their great grandmother do).

It's a strange life, and Mr Shakespeares rejoinder to Horatio, i reckon, is so spot on.

 

[Sharon Hill]

...the signals generated by water running through narrow channels and strata -- which is what a dowser is actually usually seeking, a constant flow that can be used as a source.

This makes little sense. Groundwater moving through porous or fractured rock moves VERY VERY SLOWLY, as in hours or days to go a few feet if there is no induced gradient. The idea that there are "underground rivers" that people can detect is generally false unless you are talking a major fracture zone or karst conduits. And, if that is the case, then there are obvious signs of where to get water as the subsurface manifests in some fashion at the surface. Sorry, not sold. The Russians generally think in a more mystical way than Westerners when it comes to paranormal stuff, doesn't mean they actually have discovered something genuine.

I give you that dowsing is hard to test in real life situations but one could have dowsers find a dry hole and a wet hole in the same area. That would be more impressive (though not many people want to spend to drill a dry hole). I still contend that local people who know the area (where there are ample aquifers) will more often than not hit water wherever they point. So, they appear to be talented.

You say many psychics are clever frauds. Yep. So are many dowsers. Like psychics, they may even believe themselves.

 

[Carl Grove]

This makes little sense. Groundwater moving through porous or fractured rock moves VERY VERY SLOWLY, as in hours or days to go a few feet if there is no induced gradient. The idea that there are "underground rivers" that people can detect is generally false unless you are talking a major fracture zone or karst conduits. And, if that is the case, then there are obvious signs of where to get water as the subsurface manifests in some fashion at the surface. Sorry, not sold. The Russians generally think in a more mystical way than Westerners when it comes to paranormal stuff, doesn't mean they actually have discovered something genuine.

I give you that dowsing is hard to test in real life situations but one could have dowsers find a dry hole and a wet hole in the same area. That would be more impressive (though not many people want to spend to drill a dry hole). I still contend that local people who know the area (where there are ample aquifers) will more often than not hit water wherever they point. So, they appear to be talented.

You say many psychics are clever frauds. Yep. So are many dowsers. Like psychics, they may even believe themselves.

Well, I'm not saying how quickly the water would be moving in the Russian example, and I know "underground rivers" are not on the agenda. Reddish didn't actually do any dowsing for water, he was just testing the response to straight edges. I don't think he observed any change in response to pipes containing air or water. I think that more experienced dowsers might have been more sensitive to any small difference.
Oddly, I don't hear about fraudulent dowsers very often; dowsers get their reputation from their results, so if they fail to deliver there is no way they can disguise it, unlike many so-called psychics. Many of the New Age types do regard themselves as something special because of their skills, though, which is why the Sanderson experiment came as a shock to some of them. Unfortunately, as in the case of many other phenomena, the failure of scientists to respond sensibly to so called paranormal events has led to the takeover by the weird and wonderful brigade, at least as far as energy dowsing is concerned.
The most accessible source on Soviet dowsing work is Ostrander and Schroeder's book Psychic Discoveries. The water geologist, Professor Bogomolov, taught himself to dowse and found that he could determine the depths of underground water sources, locate pipes and cables, and estimate the diameters of water pipes. He published his first report with coauthors water engineering specialists Tareev and Simonov in 1944.
Some of his interesting findings: he tested the dowsing skills of around 100 men detecting electric cables, water pipes, and seeping groundwater. He also measured the force exerted on the dowsing sticks (the older Y shaped model) and estimated it up to 1000gm/cm.
Screening the dowsers with rubber or steel had no effect but water could not be detected inside a rubber hose.
Another geologist, Nicolai Sochevanov, looked at water dowsing. He found that a large body of water had little effect, but friction of water on the shore or movement through an underground saturated mass of soil did. He used a wire dowsing device of his own design and found that he could get strong effects from underground deposits (e.g. of lead). He found he could detect 3" thick ore deposits at 150 yards depth. And there is more -- well worth getting the book. It is a great pity that English translations of many Russian articles and books are just not available.

 

[Carl Grove]

Living in Witham, Essex I was very impressed with this Essex Mystery http://vulpeculox.net/misc/mystery.htm

Now, after reading this thread, it seems it is all an illusion

OK, I've gone into this in some detail now. Amazingly, that site actually underestimates the degree of linearity in that alignment. Maybe someone will double check my working.
First, using a small scale map is very misleading -- the precision is poor. https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=5&lat=56.0000&lon=-4.0000&layer gives access to an old large scale map of 25ins to the mile, and information about both geographical coordinates and OS grid data. You can also compare the map with satellite imagery. I also checked Google Earth to get more information about the buildings. To determine the exact centre of a building you place a pointer on it, and this gave the following data:

The Compasses, Littley Green: OS Easting 217234, Northing 569871
Square & Compasses, Fuller Street: Easting 216041, Northing 574741
The Compasses, Great Totham: Easting 213085, Northing 586817
St Johns Church, Little Leighs: Easting 216751, Northing 571901

Thanks to a useful online calculating site, I found that the correlation coefficient for these data is -0.999993

That is the highest correlation coefficient I have ever come across. The alignment is as good as it can get. It's not a "ley" but someone went to a lot of trouble to site these buildings in a precise way.

 

[Tempest63]

OK, I've gone into this in some detail now. Amazingly, that site actually underestimates the degree of linearity in that alignment. Maybe someone will double check my working.
First, using a small scale map is very misleading -- the precision is poor. https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=5&lat=56.0000&lon=-4.0000&layer gives access to an old large scale map of 25ins to the mile, and information about both geographical coordinates and OS grid data. You can also compare the map with satellite imagery. I also checked Google Earth to get more information about the buildings. To determine the exact centre of a building you place a pointer on it, and this gave the following data:

The Compasses, Littley Green: OS Easting 217234, Northing 569871
Square & Compasses, Fuller Street: Easting 216041, Northing 574741
The Compasses, Great Totham: Easting 213085, Northing 586817
St Johns Church, Little Leighs: Easting 216751, Northing 571901

Thanks to a useful online calculating site, I found that the correlation coefficient for these data is -0.999993

That is the highest correlation coefficient I have ever come across. The alignment is as good as it can get. It's not a "ley" but someone went to a lot of trouble to site these buildings in a precise way.

You have restored my faith.
And I can assure you I wouldn’t know how to do what you have done.

 

[Carl Grove]

You have restored my faith.
And I can assure you I wouldn’t know how to do what you have done.

I had forgotten most of my statistics formulae and even how to use my ancient scientific calculator, so it took me a while. Amazing what you can get online!

 

[Carl Grove]

You have restored my faith.
And I can assure you I wouldn’t know how to do what you have done.

I wondered where, if anywhere, the line was pointing. At first glance it seemed to be heading for Baldock, the town founded by the Knights Templar (named after Baghdad), but it passed by to the south and the only other possible target was Stratford on Avon, where it ran south of the town centre. So I computed a great circle and wondered whether it might go towards the Middle East, which it did, but missed Baghdad by a wide margin. Finally I headed Westwards wondering if it might point to Oak Island (well, you never know!) but it passed the southern edge of Newfoundland instead. So unless it is pointing to some smaller target in Eastern England, I have to admit defeat! But why create a perfect alignment, draw attention to it in such an obvious way, and fail to have it pointing at something?

 

[Tempest63]

I wondered where, if anywhere, the line was pointing. At first glance it seemed to be heading for Baldock, the town founded by the Knights Templar (named after Baghdad), but it passed by to the south and the only other possible target was Stratford on Avon, where it ran south of the town centre. So I computed a great circle and wondered whether it might go towards the Middle East, which it did, but missed Baghdad by a wide margin. Finally I headed Westwards wondering if it might point to Oak Island (well, you never know!) but it passed the southern edge of Newfoundland instead. So unless it is pointing to some smaller target in Eastern England, I have to admit defeat! But why create a perfect alignment, draw attention to it in such an obvious way, and fail to have it pointing at something?

You don’t know it’s not pointing at something, you just haven’t found what it’s pointing at! (Cue twilight zone intro)

 

[Carl Grove]

You don’t know it’s not pointing at something, you just haven’t found what it’s pointing at! (Cue twilight zone intro)

True. Maybe I'll try to follow its course on Google Earth or something... will see.

 

[Tempest63]

True. Maybe I'll try to follow its course on Google Earth or something... will see.

If it points to our house I can assure you nothing weird is going on in the Anderson Shelter, but please drop in for tea.

 

[Carl Grove]

If it points to our house I can assure you nothing weird is going on in the Anderson Shelter, but please drop in for tea.

Thanks, I'll think about it. Good old Winston will see us through!

 

[EnolaGaia]

Yes, we do have a thread, already (it's here, stickied, three above this one in the forum list at the time of writing, perhaps misleadingly entitled "Ley Lines".) But all that said, I just think this one really, really deserves to stand alone for the moment..

It's OK, I've linked to that one anyway. I think this one could be quite special. ...

IMHO the moment has passed, and the separate "Ley lines (My thoughts)" thread is no longer justified. It's now merged into the original Ley Lines thread.