Slashdot Mirror


Iraq Swears By Dowsing Rod Bomb Detector

jggimi writes "According to the New York Times, more than fifteen hundred remote sensing devices have been sold to Iraq's Ministry of the Interior, at prices ranging from $16,500 to $60,000 each. The devices are used for bomb and weapon detection at checkpoints, and have no battery or other power source. Sounds great, but according to a retired United States Air Force officer, Lt. Col. Hal Bidlack, they work on the same principle as a Ouija board — the power of suggestion. He described the wand as nothing more than an explosives divining rod. Even though the device has been debunked by the US Military, the US Department of Justice, and even Sandia National Laboratories, the Iraqis are thrilled with the devices. 'Whether it's magic or scientific, what I care about is it detects bombs,' said Maj. Gen. Jehad al-Jabiri, head of the Ministry of the Interior's General Directorate for Combating Explosives."

38 of 652 comments (clear)

  1. Now you know by Sean · · Score: 4, Insightful

    where those billions and billions of dollars went.

    1. Re:Now you know by quenda · · Score: 5, Funny

      On the plus side, these devices would have been just as effective at locating Saddam's WMDs as any other detectors.

  2. Another reason why by geekoid · · Score: 4, Funny

    they shouldn't be allowed to have the bomb. On the plus side, there an easier target.

    Maybe I should sell them my ballistic missile protection rock. Only 10 million dollars, and if you are hit by an ICBM contact me for a full refund.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Another reason why by quenda · · Score: 4, Insightful

      they shouldn't be allowed to have the bomb.

      Hmm ... you do realise that's Iraq with a Q, not with an N? The country with the nuclear weapons^Wpower program is next door.

    2. Re:Another reason why by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right, because we're so much smarter than the Iraqis. We have never had dumb/superstitious people in charge of our military. Therefore they can't handle nukes and we can. /sarcasm

      I'd argue that mutually assured destruction is dumber than what we're seeing here. Both are pretty shocking, but "magic bomb detector" risks at most several soldiers' lives, not, you know, everything.

      In case you forgot, our leaders were the ones that relied on MAD. With all our eductation and logic, that is what we came up with. If this is the dumbest thing Iraq is doing coming out of Saddam's rule, with little recent history of competent leaders, they're doing pretty well. I wouldn't want them to have nukes, but we're not people who should have nukes either.

    3. Re:Another reason why by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Informative

      Agree, but MAD is hardly the best example... in fact, it actually makes a lot of sense, despite the fact that it is, indeed, mad. But look at some of the more ridiculous weapons exercises and theories funded by the Pentagon over the years -- who the hell else would come up with the idea of an anti-ballistic missile system based on a satellite and powered by a nuclear explosion? Or even more ridiculous stuff like the gay bomb. The Pentagon and intel agencies actually spent millions on "psychic warfare" projects at one point; one of the projects allegedly included a plan to develop some sort of time-travel based ABM device -- zap the enemy's missiles back in time so they can explode harmlessly in the past. Seriously. If the Iraqis are spending only $60k apiece on divining rods they are getting off cheap.

    4. Re:Another reason why by gtall · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let's rewind time a bit; suppose Einstein's advice was followed and the U.S. didn't build the bomb. No Hiroshima or Nagasaki as testament to its effects. It is known the Soviet Union was working on their own as was Germany. After the war, both the Soviets and the U.S. rushed to grab German scientists. So even if the Soviet Union wasn't working on it during the war, they'd have been working on it after. And they were led by that great humanitarian, Stalin. Hmmmm....what would a Stalin do with nukes knowing no one could retaliate...I give up, I cannot guess...

      Let's assume that Stalin gets a case of Empathy and decides not to nuke his enemies, even the real ones. Roll time forward a bit. Iran decides it needs nukes to get out the Kill-the-Jews vote in Islam. The U.S., having eschewed nukes because they were bad, would surely have pressured Israel into no nukes as well. There is no stopping Iran from getting a nuke, they need it to help bring back the Mahdi and well, y'know, there are still some undead Jews.

      Then there are those nice N. Koreans who are about as well adjusted as a squirrel after his third cup of coffee. Would you like L.A. with that holocaust or just a bit of self-indulgent sugar?

  3. It's not so stupid... by Jahava · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But the device works “on the same principle as a Ouija board”

    So in effect, this device will justify my search of anyone that I feel has a bomb. Even if I know it's bogus (and I'd not be surprised if the Iraqis do know this), it permits me to search anyone I want just because I feel they may have a bomb. I'd not be surprised if there was some correlation between suspicious-looking-folks and folks-with-bombs, so the power of unbounded searching is probably (somewhat) effective.

    On the other hand, if they really do believe that these devices work, then the bombers may share those beliefs. That, also, could deter bombings.

    Either way, it's a win for Iraq ... well, if you don't care about human rights and the millions of dollars.

  4. Works very simply by jpmorgan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It works on a very simple principle, that is used in many devices sold today: the company that makes them probably kicks half the price back to the official who authorized the purchase.

  5. May have a benefit.... by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It may still have a benefit if the terrorists also have such a blind belief in the technology. If they know there are bomb detectors at the gate, they will be less likely to try to sneak a bomb through.

    --
    Qxe4
  6. Bugs Bunny by Dan+East · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anyone see the Bugs Bunny cartoon (@6:40) where he was working on an assembly line during WW2? He had a little hammer that he would tap bombs with to see if they were good or not. Of course one after another was a dud, until finally...

    I guess if your divining rod detects a suicide bomber... then what? They detonate? I guess it is 100% effective in that case. Bomb detected.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Bugs Bunny by c6gunner · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I guess if your divining rod detects a suicide bomber... then what? They detonate? I guess it is 100% effective in that case. Bomb detected.

      Checkpoints are designed to minimize damage from a ... erm ... "premature detonation". The guy with the wand might get splattered pretty good if he's right up close, but everyone else makes it out just fine. It still sucks for the guy who's swinging that thing, but it's a loss in the bad-guys book because they can't afford to trade men on a 1 to 1 basis. There's only so many crazy people who'll strap a bomb to themselves.

      Also, suicide bombers have been known to change their minds when confronted with such a situation. It's one thing to kill dozens of your enemies (even if they're civilians shopping for groceries) for the Glory of Allah - quite another thing to kill yourself and, if you're lucky, only take out one poor $2-per-hour rent a cop.

  7. So What? We use "Lie Detectors". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here in the U.S., a great many of our police departments and even federal agencies spend millions on a technology that is equally ridiculous and unprovable in any sort of peer-reviewed scientific study: Lie detectors. If we can have our lie detectors, then surely the Iraqis are entitled to their bomb sniffing dowsing rods.

    The proponents of these devices, when confronted with the undeniable technical worthlessness of them, inevitably retreat to the claim that the actual benefits come from the psychology of having people being "investigated" by the devices believe that they are actually capable of something, and then watching their reactions.

  8. I know how this got started by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dear General Jehad al-Jabiri,

    You may be surprised to hear from me. I am Mrs. John Mutube, former wife of the late general in charge of Nigerian counterterrorism forces. Upon his death I was amazed to discover 15000 (FIFTEEN THOUSAND) special BOMB DETECTION RODS. As my party has fallen out of favor, I find myself destitute. So I am offering you full possession of these BOMB DETECTION RODS for only the cost of shipping. Since the devices are heavy, I must ask that you pay for postage so I can deliver you the rods. Send either money order or credit card particulars to

    Mrs. John Mutube
    123 Mutube Street
    Benin, Nigeria

    I look forward to your successful counterterrorism endeavor.

    I am, yours truly,

    Mrs. John Mutube

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  9. Re:This kind of upsets me by binarylarry · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh I know what you mean.

    I mean, before America showed up it was a happy place. They had flowing meadows, and rainbow skies, and rivers made of chocolate where the children danced and laughed and played with gumdrop smiles.

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  10. Re:Security theater... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

    You fool! The manual specifically stated that rigorous statistical analysis clogs the overunity detector grid and attracts terrorists! Only blind faith can allow the system to protect us.

  11. Re:This kind of upsets me by quenda · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why should our good men and (and a few women) have to die to 'help' these people?

    They have oil, and lots of it. As do their neighbours. You seriously have not heard? There is no other reason.
    The US alone uses something like 20 million barrels a day and rising, while production is well under half that and falling.
    That's a billion dollars per day, and set to rise dramatically as production fails to rise with global demand.

  12. Re:Water for Thought... by ShawnDoc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow. If you heard it from a co-worker, it must be true!

  13. Re:This kind of upsets me by Anpheus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Before America showed up they had a tyrant dictator who had the good sense to stay out of religious disputes in an area where people with religious disputes are prone to making their case with guns and bombs, even if it means taking their own lives.

    We then invaded this not-so-idyllic nation with not so much as a whit of an idea about what to do to turn such a place into a thriving democracy, when doing so would be plainly unfair to the minorities in the religious disputes.

    Democracy works when reasonable people come together and are willing to make decisions and sacrifices for the betterment of all the people. It does not work, sadly, in nations where it has been forced into existence replacing an existing corrupt government that the people had no faith in, and no reason to believe in the new government.

    Perhaps I'm oversimplifying, but it seems to me that the way to bring "peace" to the Middle East would be through reason, brutally slow diplomacy and encouraging expression of ideas and open debates, encouraging education of children male and female, etc. Basically, using the thin edge of the wedge. Instead we came in with guns and bombs, things these people are all too familiar with, and the ones who don't like us responded in kind.

  14. Re:This kind of upsets me by Idiomatick · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's like saying it is ok for me to shit in my roommates bed because he hardly ever cleans.

  15. Seen this before! by mr100percent · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Michael Shermer, famous Skeptic, gave a TED speech on "why people believe strange things." He actually brought one of those detectors out on stage, and said that US public schools were buying it as a marijuana detector, and paying hundreds of dollars for it. Looking at the image in the article, it appears to be the same device.

    1. Re:Seen this before! by Copid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course, it also doesn't hurt that dowsing using rods for drugs in schools amounts to essentially a random search, increasing the probability that you'll get caught with contraband even though there is zero correlation between the rod's response and actual contraband. Administrators could say, "We roll the dice, and if they come up snake eyes, you get searched," and end up with a pretty good drop in drug activity. Then again, people would be up in arms about that.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
  16. Re:Insightful by buswolley · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Decades ago, the county used to hire my Grandfather to use divining rods to find pipes and electrical wires underground when they could find the original drafting maps.

    He had a bit of success at it too.

    Why? How? I do not know. He's is the best man I have ever known, and I trust him.

    --

    A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

  17. Best quote of the article by adamchou · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don’t care about Sandia or the Department of Justice or any of them,” General Jabiri said. “I know more about this issue than the Americans do. In fact, I know more about bombs than anyone in the world.

  18. Re:This kind of upsets me by twostix · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you are an American, Englishman, Frenchman, German, Australian, Canadian or other western individual your country, civilisation and way of life depends 110% on keeping those barrels of oil flowing into your trucks, tractors, machinery and cars.

    Without those barrels of oil your lifestyle will go back to 1900's style in many ways and quite a few of you will die. Coal of course can pick up the slack in many areas of energy production but then be prepared for the pollution and death that it brings...1900 style fogs of coal particles. Food production will decrease and the labour needed to produce it will go up by tenfold so without being alarmist millions of people in the less fortunate parts of the world will die without the wealth of cheap western food that much of that oil grows that keeps them fed.

    As for the environment and CO2 emmissions without oil, what we're putting out now will be like a trickle compared to using coal.

    It seems rather hypocritical to me to rail against Blood for Oil while living extremely comfortably in an advanced western society directly reaping the benefits of having that oil in the fuel tank of your car or providing power to your public transport or the plastic for nearly every type of luxury possible and fertiliser for your food that makes tomatoes and potatoes worth less than $1000 a tonne. Especially hypocritical is the western metro, urban left who have the more than anyone else on the entire planet to lose if the oil stops...

    I guess it's easier to project the guilt onto the big bad rich white men. Kinda like how many junkies blame their dealers for the state of their own lives...

  19. Re:Insightful by roguetrick · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually a hallmark of dowsers is they tend not to purposefully lie. They certainly believe what they're saying due to the strength of the idoemotor effect and confirmation bias.

    --
    -The world would be a better place if everyone had a hoverboard
  20. Re:This kind of upsets me by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's funny, but people seem to be tolerant of their own messes more readily than somebody else's, especially when it's their country. I'm not saying we didn't make a lot of things better, but if you want gratitude for coming in and fixing somebody else's country, man, the bar is high. Especially when you have all kinds of ethnic and religious fault lines running through the country, which pretty much means every time you scratch your ass, millions of people on one side win and millions on the other lose.

    My problem with the war all along was that once the original WMD rationale didn't pan out, there wasn't any kind of strategic focus. I caught some flack from my fellow liberals when I said, well, doing such and so is probably good, or the surge will probably reduce violence. But the problem was never that there weren't worthwhile things to get done. It was that the "and then what happens" part seldom got thought through very far, and the "and then after that" part about never. We would invade "and then we'd be greeted as liberators." Ok and what happens after that? We'd rebuild X schools, yeah that's good. But then what happens after that? If we use much higher troop levels, we can control violence better (well, duh). And then what? Actually the surge was probably the most promising piece of strategy in the war, because there actually *were* a lot of things we wanted to be able to do in the breathing space that gave us. But we didn't know *how* to do them and most of them didn't happen.

    And there was never a sequence of milestones that ended like this: "and then Iraq was able to manage its own internal and external security and most of our guys get to come home." Maybe it wasn't humanly possible to envision a series of milestones like that, between the Kurds and the Sunni and the Shia and the outside interference from Iran and Jihadi groups. Still, much of the strategic thinking in Washington seemed to amount to this: we were fighting there so we could get to keep on fighting there.

    That's the problem with sending our good men and women -- and even the *bad* men and women too like those shits in the Abu Ghraib photos -- to die.. It's not that there aren't imaginable goals that are worth the cost, or that even helping the people of Iraq isn't worth the cost. It's that without a better strategy, the only certain payoff for the death of one of guys has been that we get to send *more* of our guys to be killed. That's a mindset that has for any practical purpose accepted defeat, but won't admit it for political reasons.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  21. Re:Insightful by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember reading something about it in New Scientist years ago (probably 1980 something). It was about research into magnetic fields and what happens when water moves and the jist of it was that some people are unconsciously sensitive to these fields.

    I can't remember the details, but it does kind of make sense to me considering that there are lots of animals with sensitivity to magnetic fields and our own bodies are full of little tiny ferrite dots being pumped around. It doesn't make much sense to me when it comes to detecting explosives, but a fool and his money are soon parted...

    That copy of New Scientist was given to me by my grandfather who taught me divining. It goes back centuries in our family.

    --
    I don't therefore I'm not.
  22. Re:Insightful by fracai · · Score: 4, Informative

    Presuming that those "tiny ferrite dots being pumped around" are iron in your blood, you're wrong. Blood iron isn't ferrous.

    Divining has long been shown to be explained by the ideomotor effect, environmental cues [1], and confirmation bias. It isn't any better than chance.

    If you think your abilities are genuine, allow me to introduce you to the 1 Million Dollars that must be waiting for you over at the JREF. http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

    [1] Cues that anyone can pick up on, nothing that is unique to dowsing or dowsers.

    --
    -- i am jack's amusing sig file
  23. Expensive placebos are more effective. by Animal+Farm+Pig · · Score: 4, Informative

    Expensive placebos are more effective.

  24. Re:Insightful by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mentioning James Randi's 'challenge' doesn't garner you (or him) any credibility. Its not exactly in the same league as an 'X' prize. He's backed out of his offer several times to my knowledge.

    You will have to do better than that. The only 'backing out' I've ever heard of has really just been sour grapes from losers who couldn't even pass the preliminary requirements of minimal verification, much less the full test of scientific reproducibility.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  25. Re:Insightful by The_Wilschon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Neither of which is the same thing as ferromagnetic.

    --
    SIGSEGV caught, terminating

    wait... not that kind of sig.
  26. Re:Insightful by shaitand · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone who gets the chance to meta mod needs to fix this. Disagreeing with the parent does not make him a troll.

  27. Re:Insightful by shaitand · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Please down mod the parent. People do not get down modded because others disagree with them. There is no -1 I think this guys beliefs are a crock.

    A recommendation that the moderation system be abused to censor opposing viewpoints is certainly a troll at the very least.

  28. You don't have to believe in it. by LKM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't ask me how it works - those witching sticks are just dead wooden sticks in my hands. But, I've seen it work, so I have to believe in it.

    No, you don't. As Feynman said, “The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.”

    We use the scientific process precisely because we can't just trust ourselves. A few weeks ago, I climbed on a mountain, sat in the grass, and watched the clouds. Suddenly, the clouds started to move backwards and forwards. It's a miracle! I've seen it with my own eyes! Well, no. It's an optical illusion that some people get when staring into a bright light for too long.

    Likewise, since all experiments have shown that dowsing rods work exactly as well as random chance, the most likely explanation for your father in law's ability is that he's able to subconsciously deduce where pipes go and where they are broken based on the effects these things have on the environment. That also explains why it doesn't work for you.

    1. Re:You don't have to believe in it. by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've got a couple dozen acres with gas lines crossing it in places. I can tell where the pipes are laid because the ground is slightly off from when they backfilled the trench they dug, in certain lines, the grass grows differently because, I suspect, the drainage is different for that location, and the undisturbed ground.

      The pipes were laid 20 years ago.

      Now, a lot of people here are ALSO falling for the mystique of the sceptic. Just because you don't have an immediate explanation for something, doesn't automatically make the 'capability' false.

      I believe it is possible that there may be clues that our bodies pick up, but we ignore with our often distracted conscious minds. Now, does that mean I believe in dowsing? No, it isn't an admission of belief, but I wouldn't discount that we might be ignoring some feedback from our bodies that we normally don't acknowledge.

      See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Possibility_of_human_tetrachromats

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
  29. Re:Insightful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Your explanation might work except all test requirements are agreed upon by both parties. The tests are always accepted beforehand by both parties. And the conditions are always mind-numbingly simple, and people with real abilities should have no problem passing them. Look at the list of some who claim to be Dowsers:

    http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=87076
    -> was given a list of people on the missing persons list, he claimed he could indicate whether they were dead or alive. he picked half dead, half alive. They were all dead.
    http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=37686
    -> never formally applied
    http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=33082
    -> Would not allow analysis of his homemade 'amplifier'
    http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=29682
    -> performed his own double-blind tests only to discover that he had deluded himself
    http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=28111
    -> Withdrew his application

    Which ones of these do you think were gypped by the JRF? See them at http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=43, and find me one that you think was treated unfairly.

    Of the few people who have come forward to try to pursue the "I got gypped!" angle, I watched the videos and read the transcripts and they all failed miserably.

    In short, you have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.

  30. Re:Insightful by Quothz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Even today, the city of DeQueen, Arkansas employs an old Native American in the water department. He has the willow sticks like father in law used, but he also has a pair of copper rods that he likes better.

    That was such a fascinating story, I called up John O'Connor, Water Superintendent for DeQueen. Despite almost two decades with the city's water department, he knows nothing of such a man and denies that the city has used dowsing in his tenure or, to his knowledge, in his lifetime. Nor is he familiar with any local legends of such a thing. Since the department employs only 70 people, I'm pretty sure Mr. O'Connor is familiar with them all.

    I assume your father-in-law's acuity with the "witchin' sticks" is equally fictitious, and that your personal experience is simple wishful thinking.