Captain

There is no magnetic field in the center of a magnet. Try the pin experiment I mentioned and you'll see - there's no pull on the pin, none. Davis and Rawls aren't the only ones that say the North and South poles of a magnet spin in opposite directions or that the magnetic field does not go directly from the South pole to the North pole. Read a little about the work of Howard Johnson. http://aias.us/documents/otherPapers/Johnson-Magnets.pdf Here are a few more scientists that don't agree with mainstream science on this issue. http://www.guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/story/Shad/index.html It seems to me mainstream science is designed to keep everyone thinking in little boxes.

No, the magnetometer requires no power source. I've tried it every which way and the results are the same, the measurement of the magnetic fields goes from positive, to zero, to negative or vice versa. I don't see how you can just ignore the evidence I have accumulated. The saying, "there are none so blind as those who will not see" comes to mind. You must at least consider the possibility that Davis and Rawls are not the ones who are "error prone". Physics is still full of unproven theories. Maybe this is the reason they haven't be proven. They're wrong. If they are wrong, you'll never know it being in such a rush to dismiss Davis and Rawls.

First of all, the magnetic field exits the magnet from the side too, not only from the surface of the pole itself. The strongest magnetic field does exit from each pole, but it can also be measured perpendicular to the pole. I've tried measuring the poles of a magnet with the magnetometer perpendicular to the magnetic poles and parallel to them, and it reads zero either way when I place the magnetometer between the two poles.

Enviro-Magnetics, Inc., the company mentioned in the United Nations article is part of Biomagnetics International, Inc., Walter Rawls' company. You say there is no explanation as to how the biomagnetic bioremediation process works. Read the patent. http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5709223-description.html One argument I've heard many times is that there is no scientific evidence that magnetic fields have any significant effect on living organisms, but the United Nations article and the Journal study refute that argument. You haven't heard that in the media, have you? The National Medical Association did a study and published the results. It's not a Davis and Rawls claim, it's the results of the study. If it was a drug in the study I'm sure you'd accept the results, but accepting these results means you're forced to consider that your teachings may not be entirely accurate. That can't be it. When has anyone in history ever withheld information or discoveries for power, money, control or simply because of their own egos? It's accepted that magnetism has two poles, but not that they have different effects, and the Journal study clearly shows different effects. I just bought that magnetometer, and each time I place it between the North and South poles of any magnet the magnetic field measures zero. Explain that. I purchased one of their videos too, and in it there are photos of scientists from Westinghouse, Toyota, and other companies that visited the Albert Roy Davis lab in the 1970's, but surely you guys know better than they do. Do you want to see a few photos from the 1970's? This is a website about the work of Dr. Ralph Sierra, who was introduced to biomagnetics by Davis and Rawls. Look at the two photos on the bottom left and the bottom right of the page. On the left you'll see the figure eight I described in my first post. http://www.jarrotsierra.com/gallery.htm

If you think Tesla was just "one of the most well known" you have no idea what he accomplished. There is a reason that's he's been called "The Man Who Invented the Twentieth Century", and that's because he basically did. Do you want to read a scientific study that proves that the North and South poles are different? Here you go. http://www.magnetage.com/Journal_Report.html Here's an article on the United Nations website for you to read. Scroll to the bottom. http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/Publications/INSIGHT/Sum-95/7.asp How does this meter tell the difference between the two poles if there isn't any? http://www.magnetlabs.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=71&products_id=198&zenid=56faaafcb84c4879c850c5990184a9a7 How are you going to explain it away this time?

Here are a couple of quotes from the greatest scientist that has ever lived. I just found them. It's funny how directly they address the previous post. What synchonicity. "The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane." Nikola Tesla "Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality." Nikola Tesla Considering Tesla's stance, maybe you should reconsider yours.

In their book, Magnetism and Its Effects on the Living System, they list dozens of doctors and scientists that have duplicated their work (and they detail some experiments). They've worked with the Dr. Yerkes, from the famous Yerkes Primate Biological Laboratories, Professor Bessie O'Conner, from Midnapore, Alberta, Canada, Dr. N. S. Hanoka, from the University of Israel and many others. Buckminster Fuller has apparently endorsed their work, as has Morris Tischler, inventor of the first solid-state pacemaker, and Hans Selye, all of whom are famous in their fields of study. If there's nothing to the Davis and Rawls discoveries, they sure fooled some brilliant people. I think too many of you are prematurely judging their work without obtaining any knowledge of it. How many researchers in the past have been labeled quacks by the mainstream, and end up being vindicated many years later? There have many, most notably Nikola Tesla. Wireless communication, robots, radio, AC electricity and so on, were once considered the ravings of a quack. As it turned out Tesla was just way ahead of his time. Interestingly, some people still don't give him the credit he deserves. I recently saw a show on the History Channel about electricity, and when the discovery of alternating current electricity was discussed, Westinghouse was credited with it. There was no mention of Tesla at all. What kind of "history" is that? He's only the one who discovered that is was possible, and how to do it. That's like discussing the general theory of relativity, and never mentioning Einstein.

If there is no truth to their work, and it's just pseudoscience, how do you explain this? http://www.magnetlabs.com/articles/biorem_art.html -or this (scroll down half way)http://www.magnetlabs.com/articles/biomagrev.html

It wasn't easy, but look what I found. Scroll down about two thirds of the way down the page, in the third paragraph under "Cometary tails". Read the third sentence. The description is of the magnetic lines of the solar wind around the cometary ionosphere of Comet P/Giacobini-Zinner. http://www.britannica.com/dday/print?articleId=110156&fullArticle=true&tocId=54338

According to Davis and Rawls, the magnetic North pole of the earth is in the Northern hemisphere, not the Southern hemisphere, so by that definition, it is desribed correctly.

Here's a very interesting article that does seem to show pretty convincingly that magnetism does indeed flow. http://www.magnetlabs.com/labs/flow.html

I'm not so convinced of its accuracy. Here's an article I recently read on this very subject. http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/Wikipedia.html

According to a scientist named Albert Roy Davis, magnetism consists of two separate energies with opposite effects. The North pole has a counterclockwise spin and causes matter to contract while the South pole has a clockwise spin and causes matter to expand. Davis and Rawls describe in their first book, Magnetism and Its Effects on the Living System, that the currently accepted method of showing the lines of force of a magnet (Faraday's) is incorrect. There are other incorrect conclusions according to Davis and Rawls regarding the directional flow of magnetic energy. Here is what they have to say about Faraday's method. "The use of a flat piece of paper with iron filings placed on its top and the bringing up under that paper a magnet to show the magnet's lines of force is incorrect and should not be used in textbooks of many types to educate students, because each fine particle of the steel or iron filings when placed in the field of the magnet under the paper becomes a miniature magnet in itself; thus the total picture is incorrect and misleading. As each miniature magnet then attracts and repels, the picture is distorted to present a mistaken concept." Instead, take a large glass or plastic bowl, such as a fish bowl, fill it with water and pour in a handful of barium ferrite particles. Use a cylinder magnet that is 3 inches long, like an alnico "cow magnet", and stir the water briskly so the particles become suspended in the water. Keep the magnet in a vertical position and then stop stirring. The least amount of particles will be at the exact center of the cylinder magnet. The shape of the particles will form what looks like a figure eight. In science it is still taught that magnetism flows in one direction, usually said to be from the South pole to the North pole. Davis and Rawls state that magnetism flows in both directions simultaneously, S to N and N to S. This experiment explains how they came to this conclusion. "This test consists of a microscope slide, a few drops of diluted sulfuric acid, a medium power microscope, placing a magnet at each end of the slide, the diluted acid touching each magnet. Microscopic viewing after a few minutes allows one to see the energies of the two pole effects and the two directional movements of the sulfuric acid hydrogen bubble movement." Yet another error that they discovered is that magnetic energy doesn't flow in a semicircle from one pole to the other. Again, this experiment explains how they arrived at this conclusion. "The simple test to support this incorrectness is to take a three- to six-inch bar or cylinder magnet and place it on a wood or plastic table, any base material that is not magnetic. Next, take a straight pin and, holding it between the thumb and the index finger, place it at one end of the magnet. Moving the pin very slowly the length of the magnet, maintaining a slight upward pull, yet keeping the pin in contact with the magnet, at the exact or almost exact center of the length of the magnet you will find one fractional place at that center where there is NO PULL. Therefore, no measurable amount of magnetism exists at the direct center of the magnet." I've found that placing the pin (I used a sewing needle) perpendicular to the cylinder magnet worked very well. I couldn't feel any magnetic pull on the needle at the center of the magnet. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------