Editing Dowsing (section)

==Studies==
* Dowsing studies from the early twentieth century were examined by [[geologist]] [[John Walter Gregory]] in a report for the [[Smithsonian Institution]]. Gregory concluded that the results were a matter of chance or explained by observations from ground surface clues.<ref name="K6Ds8">Gregory, J. W. (1928). [https://archive.org/stream/annualreportofbo1928smit#page/n381/mode/2up ''Water Divining'']. Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution. United States Government Printing Office. pp. 325–348.</ref><ref name="skmP5">[[Hugh Robert Mill|Mill, Hugh Robert]]. (1927) ''Belief and Evidence in Water Divining''. ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' 120: 882–884.</ref>
* Geologist W. A. MacFadyen tested three dowsers during 1943–1944 in [[Algeria]]. The results were entirely negative.<ref name="cMWQb">MacFadyen, W. A. (1946). ''Some Water Divining in Algeria''. ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' 157: 304–305.</ref>
* A 1948 study in [[New Zealand]] by P. A. Ongley tested 75 dowsers' ability to detect water. None of them was more reliable than chance. According to Ongley "not one showed the slightest accuracy."<ref name="yIPj4">{{cite journal|last=Ongley|first=P.|year=1948|title=New Zealand Diviners|journal=New Zealand Journal of Science and Technology|url=https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.27619/2015.27619.The-New-Zealand-Journal-Of-Science-And-Technology-Vol-30#page/n39/mode/2up|volume=30|pages=38–54}} via {{cite book|last=Hines|first=Terence|title=Pseudoscience and the Paranormal|publisher=Prometheus Books|location=Amherst, NY|year=2003|edition=Second|page=420|isbn=978-1-57392-979-0}}</ref>
* [[Archaeological science|Archaeometrist]] [[Martin Aitken]] tested British dowser P. A. Raine in 1959. Raine failed to dowse the location of a buried kiln that had been identified by a [[magnetometer]].<ref name="eTpbn">Aitken, M. J. (1959). ''Test for Correlation Between Dowsing Response and Magnetic Disturbance''. Archaeometry 2: 58–59.</ref><ref name="Feder 2010">[[Kenneth Feder|Feder, Kenneth L]]. (2010). ''Encyclopedia of Dubious Archaeology: From Atlantis to Walam Olum''. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 93. {{ISBN|978-0-313-37918-5}}</ref>
* In 1971, dowsing experiments were organized by British engineer R. A. Foulkes on behalf of the [[Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom)|Ministry of Defence]]. The results were "no more reliable than a series of guesses".<ref name="MhZYu">Foulkes, R. A. (1971). ''Dowsing Experiments''. ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' 229: 163–168.</ref>
* [[Physicist]]s [[John G. Taylor|John Taylor]] and Eduardo Balanovski reported in 1978 a series of experiments they conducted that searched for unusual [[electromagnetic field]]s emitted by dowsing subjects; they did not detect any.<ref name="irk2l">{{cite journal|author1=Taylor, J. G. |author2=Balanovski, E. |year=1978|title=Can electromagnetism account for extra-sensory phenomena?|journal=Nature|volume=276|issue=5683|pages=64–67|doi=10.1038/276064a0|pmid=740020|bibcode=1978Natur.276...64B|s2cid=4316473}}</ref>
* A 1979 review by [[Evon Z. Vogt]] and [[Ray Hyman]] examined many controlled studies of dowsing for water, and found that none of them showed better than chance results.<ref name="Vogt1979" />
* British academics Richard N. Bailey, Eric Cambridge, and H. Denis Briggs, carried out dowsing experiments at the grounds of various churches. They reported successful results in their book ''Dowsing and Church Archaeology'' (1988).<ref name="Leusen 1998">Leusen, Martijn Van. (1998). ''Dowsing and Archaeology''. Archaeological Prospection 5: 123–138.</ref> Their experiments were critically examined by [[Archaeology|archaeologist]] Martijn Van Leusen who suggested they were badly designed and the authors had redefined the test parameters on what was classified as a "hit" or "miss" to obtain positive results.<ref name="Leusen 1998" />
* A 2006 study of grave dowsing in Iowa reviewed 14 published studies and determined that none of them correctly predicted the location of human burials, and simple scientific experiments demonstrated that the fundamental principles commonly used to explain grave dowsing were incorrect.<ref name="MQqlI">{{cite web|last=Whittaker|first=William E.|title=Grave Dowsing Reconsidered|url=https://digital.lib.uiowa.edu/islandora/object/ui%3A29948|publisher=Office of the State Archaeologist, University of Iowa|access-date=17 June 2013|archive-date=4 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304210848/http://archaeology.uiowa.edu/files/archaeology.uiowa.edu/files/Dowsing.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>
* A randomized [[Blinded experiment|double-blind]] trial in 2012 was carried out to determine whether [[Homeopathy|homeopaths]] were able to distinguish between [[Bryonia]] and [[placebo]] by use of a dowsing method. The results were negative.<ref name="fcmmp">McCarney R, Fisher P, Spink F, Flint G, van Haselen R. (2002). [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1279512/ ''Can homeopaths detect homeopathic medicines by dowsing? A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180503085747/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1279512/ |date=2018-05-03 }}. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 95: 189–191.</ref>

===Kassel 1991 study===
A 1990 double-blind study<ref name="lezuY">[http://www.gwup.org/psitest/ GWUP-Psi-Tests 2004: Keine Million Dollar für PSI-Fähigkeiten] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050410205142/http://www.gwup.org/psitest/ |date=April 10, 2005}} (in German) and [http://www.phact.org/e/z/kassel.htm English version] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070814114138/http://www.phact.org/e/z/kassel.htm |date=August 14, 2007}}.</ref><ref name="rD0dh">{{Cite web |title=Kassel Dowsing Test - Part 1 |last1=Konig |first1=Robert |last2=Moll |first2=Jurgen |last3=Sarma |first3=Armadeo |via=Geotech - Technology for Treasure Hunting |publisher=Skeptiker |date=January 1991 |url=https://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=info/kassel/kassel1.dat |access-date=2021-05-26 |archive-date=2022-04-28 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220428092510/https://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=info/kassel/kassel1.dat |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="0C3Uf">{{Cite web |title=Kassel Dowsing Test - Part 2 |last1=Konig |first1=Robert |last2=Moll |first2=Jurgen |last3=Sarma |first3=Armadeo |via=Geotech - Technology for Treasure Hunting |publisher=Skeptiker |date=January 1991 |url=https://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=info/kassel/kassel2.dat |access-date=2021-05-26 |archive-date=2021-05-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210526210117/https://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=info/kassel/kassel2.dat |url-status=live }}</ref> was undertaken in [[Kassel]], Germany, under the direction of the ''[[Gesellschaft zur Wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung von Parawissenschaften]]'' (Society for the Scientific Investigation of the Parasciences). [[James Randi]] offered a [[US$]]10,000 prize to any successful dowser. The three-day test of some thirty dowsers involved plastic pipes through which water flow could be controlled and directed. The pipes were buried {{convert|50|cm|in|1|sp=us|lk=on}} under a level field, the position of each marked on the surface with a colored strip. The dowsers had to tell whether water was running through each pipe. All the dowsers signed a statement agreeing this was a fair test of their abilities and that they expected a 100% success rate. However, the results were no better than chance, and no one was awarded the prize.

===Betz 1990 study===
In a 1987–88 study in [[Munich]] by [[Hans-Dieter Betz]] and other scientists, 500 dowsers were initially tested for their skill, and the experimenters selected the best 43 among them for further tests. Water was pumped through a pipe on the ground floor of a two-story barn. Before each test, the pipe was moved in a direction perpendicular to the water flow. On the upper floor, each dowser was asked to determine the position of the pipe. Over two years, the dowsers performed 843 such tests and, of the 43 pre-selected and extensively tested candidates, at least 37 showed no dowsing ability. The results from the remaining 6 were said to be better than chance, resulting in the experimenters' conclusion that some dowsers "in particular tasks, showed an extraordinarily high rate of success, which can scarcely if at all be explained as due to chance&nbsp;… a real core of dowser-phenomena can be regarded as empirically proven."<ref name="munich_study_quote">Wagner, H., H.-D. Betz, and H. L. König, 1990. Schlußbericht 01 KB8602, Bundesministerium für Forschung und Technologie. [http://www.csicop.org/si/show/testing_dowsing_the_failure_of_the_munich_experiments/ As quoted by Jim T. Enright] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140329205836/http://www.csicop.org/si/show/testing_dowsing_the_failure_of_the_munich_experiments/ |date=2014-03-29 }} in the ''[[Skeptical Inquirer]]''.</ref>

Five years after the Munich study was published, [[Jim T. Enright]], a professor of [[physiology]] who emphasized correct data analysis procedure, contended that the study's results are merely consistent with [[statistical fluctuations]] and not significant. He believed the experiments provided "the most convincing disproof imaginable that dowsers can do what they claim",<ref name="enright">{{cite web |url = http://www.csicop.org/si/show/testing_dowsing_the_failure_of_the_munich_experiments |title = The Failure of the Munich Experiments |access-date = 2006-11-14 |last = Enright |first = Jim T. |date = January–February 1999 |work = Skeptical Inquirer |publisher = CSICOP |quote = The researchers themselves concluded that the outcome unquestionably demonstrated successful dowsing abilities, but a thoughtful re-examination of the data indicates that such an interpretation can only be regarded as the result of wishful thinking. |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20091117185131/http://www.csicop.org/si/show/testing_dowsing_the_failure_of_the_munich_experiments/ |archive-date = 2009-11-17 |url-status = dead}}</ref> stating that the data analysis was "special, unconventional and customized". Replacing it with "more ordinary analyses",<ref name="enright1995">{{cite journal |last1 = Enright |first1 = J. T. |year = 1995 |title = Water dowsing: The Scheunen experiments |journal = Naturwissenschaften |volume = 82 |issue = 8| pages = 360–369 |doi=10.1007/s001140050198|doi-broken-date = 1 November 2024 }}</ref> he noted that the ''best'' dowser was on average {{convert|4|mm|in|2|sp=us|lk=on}} out of {{convert|10|m|ft|2|sp=us|lk=on}} closer to a mid-line guess, an advantage of 0.04%, and that the five other "good" dowsers were on average farther than a mid-line guess. Enright emphasized that the experimenters should have decided beforehand how to statistically analyze the results; if they only afterward chose the statistical analysis that showed the greatest success, then their conclusions would not be valid until replicated by another test analyzed by the same method. He further pointed out that the six "good" dowsers did not perform any better than chance in separate tests.<ref name="enright1996">{{cite journal |last=Enright |first=J. T. |date=June 1996 |title=Dowsers lost in a Barn |journal=Naturwissenschaften |publisher=Springer Berlin / Heidelberg |volume=83 |issue=6 |pages=275–277 |issn=1432-1904 |url=http://www.idt.mdh.se/kurser/ct3340/archives/ht05/assignment-2d-dowsing-articles/Articles%202-3-Betz-Enright.pdf |access-date=2009-09-26 |doi=10.1007/BF01149601 |bibcode=1996NW.....83..275E |s2cid=8201640 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120328103212/http://www.idt.mdh.se/kurser/ct3340/archives/ht05/assignment-2d-dowsing-articles/Articles%202-3-Betz-Enright.pdf |archive-date=2012-03-28 |url-status=dead}}</ref> Another study published in ''[[Pathophysiology (journal)|Pathophysiology]]'' hypothesized that such experiments as this one that were carried out in the twentieth century could have been interfered with by man-made radio frequency radiation, as test subjects' bodies absorbed the radio waves and unconscious hand movement reactions took place following the standing waves or intensity variations.<ref name="O54Fh">{{cite journal |title=Dowsing can be interfered with by radio frequency radiation |url=http://www.pathophysiologyjournal.com/article/S0928-4680(12)00039-9/pdf |journal=Pathophysiology |volume=19 |issue=2 |year=2012| pages=89–94 |vauthors=Huttunen P, Niinimaa A, Myllylä R |doi=10.1016/j.pathophys.2012.01.004 |pmid=22365422}}</ref>