Please comment on "What the #$*! do we know"

[valiantv]

Has anyone seen the documentary, "What the #$*! do we know"?
http://www.whatthebleep.com/

It has interviews with the following:
http://www.whatthebleep.com/scientists/
PHYSICISTS
William Tiller, Ph.D.
Amit Goswami
John Hagelin, Ph.D.
Fred Alan Wolf, Ph.D.
Dr. David Albert

NEUROLOGISTS, ANESTHESIOLOGISTS & PHYSICIANS
Dr. Masaru Emoto
Stuart Hameroff M.D.
Dr. Jeffrey Satinover
Andrew B. Newberg, M.D.
Dr. Daniel Monti
Dr. Joseph Dispenza

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
Dr. Candace Pert

Are these credible scientists and does combining their ideas with spiritual teachers and mystics such as, Ramtha and Dr. Miceal Ledwith, take away from the science presented by the above?

[soupdragon2]

I think it helps take science out of the realm of bigotry and narrow mindedness. It throws a finger at intellectual lightweights like Michael Shermer, James Randi, and one or two others!

Ad hominems, maybe. Justified? Definitely!

[Glom]

What do you mean by that?

[gritmonger]

On that note, interesting commentary on the British science community as viewed by the Swedish.

British scientists exclude 'maverick' colleagues, says report
Cardiff study shows attitudes differ in UK and Sweden (http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-08/cu-bse081204.php)

However, namecalling and baseless ad hominem accusations are hallmarks of, of all things, bigotry and narrowmindedness.

[beskeptical]

The trailers are pretty cool. But the film's descriptions are so vague. I fear a religious message at the end or something.

So what is the film about besides an interesting view of reality?

I'm interested but skeptical. :wink:

Oh ya, and about the Ramtha interview, pleeeese. :roll: :roll: :roll:

[sts60]

I think it helps take science out of the realm of bigotry and narrow mindedness. It throws a finger at intellectual lightweights like Michael Shermer, James Randi, and one or two others!

Ad hominems, maybe. Justified? Definitely!No, not definitely. Justify your assertion. You sound like you simply dislike them because they have debunked so much foolishness and "voodoo science" (to use Bob Park's term). Come to think of it, do you think Bob Park is an "intellectual lightweight" as well?

[TriangleMan]

I took a look at two of the physicists just to see who they were

Amit Goswami is a professor with the Institute of Theoretical Science at the University of Orgeon. A brief google showed interviews and publications about the 'living universe', 'scientific proof of God' and similar topics.

John Hagelin, Ph.D. is a "world-renown" quantum physicist and follower of Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. He is involved in the University of Maharishi. His biography also notes that he "conducted pioneering research at CERN". You can find out more at his website (http://www.hagelin.org/).

In other words, they are scientists who are trying to blend science with new-age or eastern religious philosophy.

[russ_watters]

I think it helps take science out of the realm of bigotry and narrow mindedness. Just to be clear, are you saying that mixing science and religion is a good thing?

[R.A.F.]

In other words, they are scientists who are trying to blend science with new-age or eastern religious philosophy.

Right up soupdragon's alley. :lol:

sts60...why would soupdragon support his assertions...he's failed to do so at all in any of his other postings...why would he start now. :lol:

[valiantv]

So what is the film about besides an interesting view of reality?

The film shared much more then I understood and therefore can explain. However, what I got out of it was that in quantum physics, the observer cannot be separate from the observed.
"There is no reality in the absence of observation."
- The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

If this is so then even thoughts and feelings can affect physical reality. That our assumptions, beliefs, conditioning, etc., actually shape the reality we observe. This was true during Galileo's time when the established belief was that the Earth was the center of the Universe and several "experiments" and "observations" proved it. The film supports this idea that thoughts and feelings can affect physical reality with several interviews and the following experiments:
1. Washington DC Crime Study (http://www.whatthebleep.com/dcstudy/)
2. The Nature of Water (http://www.whatthebleep.com/crystals/)

So one question I have is about our perception of time. Is time linear and only in one direction?

Quantum Physics experiments were able to have one quantum particle in two places at the same time.

[The Bad Astronomer]

It throws a finger at intellectual lightweights like Michael Shermer, James Randi, and one or two others!


soup you've said some interesting things on this board before, but this is simply outrageous. "Intellectual lightweights"? Really? Plus, I feel compelled to mention this is an ad hominem statement.

[N C More]

I am presently reading Michael Shermer's book The Science of Good and Evil. This man is hardly an "intellectual lightweight".

[sts60]

Ah, John Hagelin (a 1994 IgNobel Prize winner (http://www.improb.com/ig/ig-pastwinners.html#ig1994)) is a bright guy who has completely jumped the reality tracks. He is one of the Maharishi Yogi crowd who, like many other New Agers, uses the language of science, but only the language - there is simply no data, none whatsoever, to support their claims, and plenty of data which refutes them.

In the case of the infamous Washington crime study, the TM crowd claimed to have reduced crime in the U.S. capital city via meditation (http://www.aps.org/WN/WN93/wn072393.cfm) - during one of the city's most terrible years (http://mpdc.dc.gov/info/districts/city/crstats_citywide_annual.shtm) for crime.

Hagelin and those like him simply make stuff up, use a lot of big words and whatever bits of data seem to support their assertions, and ignore all those inconvenient bits that contradict them. People will believe almost anything, and continue to give credence to them despite the silliest claims - such as Hagelin's leader asking for one billion dollars to establish world peace by creating an elite corps of people bouncing on their butts (http://www.aps.org/WN/WN01/wn092801.cfm).

[Ut]

Hey now. There's no need to go bashing Yogic Flying like that. It's hilarious! I mean, there's an entire political movement dedicated to the practice. If only it were supposed to be funny...

[valiantv]

Okay, it looks like all the scientists/philosophers listed under physics are attempting to connect science with spiritual consciousness:SCIENCE CONFIRMS SPIRITUALITY, NOT RELIGION (http://www.lightworks.com/MonthlyAspectarian/1998/December/1298-07.htm)

However, after doing a quick google search on all of them, only one can be accused and proven for using bad science, John Hagelin(a 1994 IgNobel Prize winner) (http://www.improb.com/ig/ig-pastwinners.html#ig1994)

Please note I did not include the Channeler in my google search, so I don't know if he/she uses bad science :wink:

Does this mean that some of the hypotheses from the film are wrong, i.e., the observer cannot be separated from the observed.

OR

Are American scientists emulating their British counterpart by excluding these scientists as "controversial 'maverick' colleagues from their community to ensure they do not gain scientific legitimacy".

If and only if the science is good, do we allow these 'maverick' scientists to "have their say" or dismiss them as woo woo psuedo-scientists? This thread shows they are being dismissed by association with John Hagelin. Do American scientists make the judgment "guilty by association" or do they judge the work?

[jumbo]

Hey now. There's no need to go bashing Yogic Flying like that. It's hilarious! I mean, there's an entire political movement dedicated to the practice. If only it were supposed to be funny...
Ah the natural law party. They hand out 'interesting' leaflets.

Now avoiding politics...
Its interesting that the study about excluding maverick scientists came from Cardiff University. Which is or was home to Chandra Wickramasinghe whose views are contoversial but he is not shunned. Also Within the astronomy department there there are what i feel are a couple of 'maverick' type people. Their ideas are not always shared by their colleagues but they are no less respected or shunned for it.

[valiantv]

Also Within the astronomy department there there are what i feel are a couple of 'maverick' type people. Their ideas are not always shared by their colleagues but they are no less respected or shunned for it.

Thanks for the information. So, what is the non-maverick perception of the following:

1. observer cannot be separate from observed.
2. one particle in two places at same time.
3. is time linear and one directional.

[tuffel999]

Dr. Candace Pert and Dr. Solomon Snyder discovered the opiate receptor but since then has gone a little weird.

[Gullible Jones]

...intellectual lightweights like Michael Shermer, James Randi...

Pardon, but how the bleep would you happen to know that they are "intellectual lightweights"? Admittedly, Randi often shows extremely strong opinions, but they are usually pretty well justified...

Of course, you all know my opinion on mysticism. God forbid that the universe should not follow our every baseless assumption... :roll:

[milli360]

Hagelin ran for USAn president (http://www.politics1.com/nlp2k.htm) as the Natural Law Party candidate that last few times.

[Maksutov]

Hagelin ran for USAn president (http://www.politics1.com/nlp2k.htm) as the Natural Law Party candidate that last few times.

USAn president? How appropriate that a Natural Law candidate would try for the United States Adopted Names (USAN) head position. What revisions to the USP would we see then! 8)

[milli360]

Maksutov:
USAn president? How appropriate that a Natural Law candidate would try for the United States Adopted Names (USAN) head position.
USAn, not USAN (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=312067&highlight=usan#312067). :)

[sts60]

I liked the ad at the bottom of this page - "Extraordinary Healer -
Experience Wondrous Channeled Distance Healing. Be Transformed!" :roll:

I'm not saying just because someone is listed with John Hagelin, he/she can automatically be dismissed as a kook. However, without knowing anything more about the film, I am already a little more squinty-eyed in my consideration of it, if they are willing to give air time to a woo-woo like Hagelin.

[TriangleMan]

The Movie Review Query Engine (www.mrqe.com) lists 6 reviews for the movie. Most reviewers found the movie entertaining but one did point out that all the people interviewed were proponents of theories that tie quantum mechanics to spiritualism, there were no "naysayers" in the film. The reviewers also did not address if there were any factual inaccuracies in the physics, which does not surprise me since it is unlikely they were well-versed on QM.

[Cougar]

So, what is the non-maverick perception of the following:

1. observer cannot be separate from observed.
2. one particle in two places at same time.
3. is time linear and one directional.
Nonlocality, or the instantaneous interconnectedness of every particle (of your body, say) to some other particle that may be on the other side of the universe, has been verified in quantum mechanics. But carrying this concept over into spirituality or the new-age connectedness of souls or whatever is merely misguided wishful thinking. Physicists are still trying to determine where and how the microworld connects to our more everyday macroworld. Certainly when I watch a batter at the ballpark, I am clearly a separate observer, and my observing has no effect on whether he hits a home run or strikes out. But as you apparently know, in the microworld things are remarkably different. Way different. An electron cannot be said to have any particular position until an experiment to determine its position is carried out. The whole idea of "position" is one that we impose on the microworld, and it only becomes relevant or manifest when we decide to make a detection. But it is us, the observers, who determine what we want to detect - momentum, position, spin, polarity. These things don't seem to be inherent qualities in the microworld until we seek to observe them.

Many of these questions are explained very well in Brian Greene's new book, The Fabric of the Cosmos.

[01101001]

The Movie Review Query Engine (www.mrqe.com) lists 6 reviews for the movie. Most reviewers found the movie entertaining but one did point out that all the people interviewed were proponents of theories that tie quantum mechanics to spiritualism, there were no "naysayers" in the film.
I think I read on the Bleep website that the scientists were chosen for having published appealing books, ones that no doubt matched the vision of the film's creators. That's fine, as long as the viewers realize the film is entertainment and not a documentary about peer-reviewed science.

[Cougar]

I think it helps take science out of the realm of bigotry and narrow mindedness.
How very insulting to all scientists, especially since science is far from the realm of bigotry and narrow-mindedness.

It throws a finger at intellectual lightweights like Michael Shermer, James Randi, and one or two others!... Ad hominems, maybe. Justified? Definitely!
Hmm. Interesting. Shermer and Randi have dedicated themselves to helping those without extensive scientific training to identify and discard all variety of pseudo-scientific or otherwise unsupported claims. And here you attack them. Without any supporting justification, I might add. This appears to place you squarely on the side of pseudo-science. I think I can say without fear of contradiction by this site's creator that one of the goals of this entire website is to combat pseudo-science, muddled thinking, and conclusions reached with no inkling of supportive evidence. Are you just trying to pick a fight, or do you really think the world would be a better place if there were MORE muddled thinking?

[Anonymous]

Normally, I find dog-piles distasteful. In this instance however, you really have earned it soupdragon.

“I think it helps take science out of the realm of bigotry and narrow mindedness.”

You had to know what was wrong with that statement even as you wrote it. No selectivity or precision. This statement can only be interpreted as a general condemnation of all science (rather than a specific discipline) and against all scientists (rather than specific individuals). I’ll make up my own mind as to where bigotry and narrow mindedness may be found. Ahem. With that one statement you’ve devastated whatever credibility you may have had previously.

“It throws a finger at intellectual lightweights like Michael Shermer, James Randi, and one or two others!”

Sin duda, the middle finger, yah? I’ve followed the accomplishments of James Randi for some 20 years and have seen only good. He is a bit outspoken at times, but this has more to do with one’s frustration threshold than high or low intellect. I’ve known of Shermer’s work for only about 10 years, but again, nothing that could possibly qualify as “lightweight”. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and read a dozen or so of your posts on a number of topics. You are in no position to critique any one as an “intellectual lightweight”.

[Musashi]

I have a question Soup. Who are the "one or two others?"

[soupdragon2]

It throws a finger at intellectual lightweights like Michael Shermer, James Randi, and one or two others!


soup you've said some interesting things on this board before, but this is simply outrageous. "Intellectual lightweights"? Really? Plus, I feel compelled to mention this is an ad hominem statement.
OK. Apologies for the ad hominem, but I'm not their biggest fan all the same.

In a way, however, I sympathise with their emotive approach to a number of issues. Given that some people make a lot of money out of pseudo-science, it seems only fair that they should be allowed to indulge in pseudo-skepticism.

[soupdragon2]

I have a question Soup. Who are the "one or two others?"
Never you mind, I've already been warned.

You are in no position to critique any one as an “intellectual lightweight”.
:lol:

You've yet to see the light!

[valiantv]

Nonlocality, or the instantaneous interconnectedness of every particle (of your body, say) to some other particle that may be on the other side of the universe, has been verified in quantum mechanics.

Wow! Thank you, especially for the reference to "The Fabric of the Cosmos."

One of the main reasons I am interested in "nonlocality" and n-dimensional Time, where n>1, is due to several experiences I have had while enjoying specific sports; such as, kayaking and climbing. I would like to describe these expereinces in an objective method without resulting to fluffy terms. I would also like to understand these expereinces in scientific terms.

Please note that these experiences were not drug induced. At least not external drug, since I do consider adrenaline a drug.

One the most vivid experience was kayaking on the Rogue River, Oregon. As I was going over Rainey falls, time seemed to slow down, my awareness became extremely keen, I became the observer and watched all my actions as if I was separate from my body. This was extremely lucky, since if I had to consciously paddle through these falls, I would have most likely broken some bones or even died. Just watching my body do the right paddling moves was fine with me.

However, this was only the beginning and only a fraction of what would follow. I began to feel as I was flowing over the rocks. Not my kayak nor my body flowing over the rocks, but as if I was the water flowing over the rocks. In my sports, I have been "in the zone" before, but this was totally different. I wasn' freaking out, but I began to physically feel many more things in and out of the river. Okay, I stop here.

Scientifically, I remember reading "Flatland". The analogy of a 2-D being pulled into the a 4-D (3 space dimension + 1 time dimension) world seemed to describe my expereince. In attempting to visualize a 5-D reality, I see our time dimension becoming the 4th space dimension ( e.g., a point moving (time) through space becomes a line, a line moving (time) perpendicular through space becomes a plane, until you get to the hypercube and beyond.

Please no woo-woo remarks. Can the analogy to flatland be applied to my expereinces and perceptions? Is this scientifically valid?

[01101001]

[quote=Cougar]One of the main reasons I am interested in "nonlocality" and n-dimensional Time, where n>1, is due to several experiences I have had while enjoying specific sports; such as, kayaking and climbing. I would like to describe these expereinces in an objective method without resulting to fluffy terms. I would also like to understand these expereinces in scientific terms.
Yeah, but you need not look to n-dimensional time for an explanation, but instead to the inaccuracy of the timekeeper. I sprained my ankle a year ago, and I can remember a long sequence of moments in the short event that must have taken no more than a fraction of a second, from the intial turning of my ankle, through the loud snap of the ligament, to the slow crumpling of my body, in stages, into a heap. I assure you time didn't slow down during that period, but my perceptions made it seem so.

A kiss might seem to last forever and be over way too soon -- or vice-versa, depending on who you're sharing it with.

When I was younger, Christmas seemed to take an eternity to arrive, but lately it's: "What, is Christmas here already!"

(And, during a thrilling adventure, besides adrenaline, don't forget the mood-altering opioid endorphins and other drugs your own body supplies itself.)

[Cougar]

As I was going over Rainey falls, time seemed to slow down, my awareness became extremely keen, I became the observer and watched all my actions as if I was separate from my body.... I began to feel as I was flowing over the rocks. Not my kayak nor my body flowing over the rocks, but as if I was the water flowing over the rocks. In my sports, I have been "in the zone" before, but this was totally different. I wasn' freaking out, but I began to physically feel many more things in and out of the river.
Hmm. Maybe you should first read The Mind's Sky, Human Intelligence in a Cosmic Context by Timothy Ferris. In it he discusses near death experiences and out-of-body experiences, not from any new-age, spiritual position but from a more rational, scientific position. It may not be authoritative, but it made a whole lot of sense to me. The human body is a wondrously complex thing, and the adrenalin you mention (and other hormones) likely play an important part in the experiences you describe. I don't think quantum nonlocality or the curious arrow of time comes into play much here...

[lyford]

I sprained my ankle a year ago, and I can remember a long sequence of moments in the short event that must have taken no more than a fraction of a second, from the intial turning of my ankle, through the loud snap of the ligament, to the slow crumpling of my body, in stages, into a heap.
Oh great, now the psychosomatic in me is empathetically feeling this pain. Loud Snap! Ouch!
My mom keeps trying to get me to see this movie to see what I think. I don't want to burst her bubble (picking on a little old lady!) and I don't want to give money to these people. Maybe I'll wait till it comes to video, which should be soon. The previews online looked laughable to me. But I have to admit that ice crystals (http://www.whatthebleep.com/crystals/) link is even better!
This is your ice:
http://www.whatthebleep.com/images/hiddenmessages.jpg
This is your ice on heavy metal music:
http://www.whatthebleep.com/images/heavy-metal-music.jpg
Yikes! No more Sepultura for me! :lol:

[lyford]

One of the main reasons I am interested in "nonlocality" and n-dimensional Time, where n>1, is due to several experiences I have had while enjoying specific sports; such as, kayaking and climbing. I would like to describe these expereinces in an objective method without resulting to fluffy terms. I would also like to understand these expereinces in scientific terms.
I would recommend looking at cognitive science, psychology such as books by Oliver Sacks or Steven Pinker instead of quantum physics. Conciousness is an amazing piece of kit - and obviously though the brain must follow the laws of physics as a piece of matter, I think the human mind is still the area of study that's most applicable to these perceptions, not quantum theory. And it's not just a question of drugs - though the body can pump out enough perception altering chemicals on its own in the right situations - there may be "software" related contributions to these experiences as well.

[Lurker]

And it's not just a question of drugs - though the body can pump out enough perception altering chemicals on its own in the right situations - there may be "software" related contributions to these experiences as well.
I can attest to some of this... increase the levels of norepinephrine and serotonin in my headbone and the voices and static that use to be there go away. In addition, the change in personality is so substantial that I am told that I am essentially a different person. The loss of about 25 years of memory is seen as a a split between the two personalities...

Very cool if the other guy does not come back... very scary if he does.... :o

[Musashi]

I have a question Soup. Who are the "one or two others?"
Never you mind, I've already been warned.

You are in no position to critique any one as an “intellectual lightweight”.
:lol:

You've yet to see the light!
I thought you were warned before you made that statement. Is this a new warning? I guess that was a nifty way for you to insult people without any consequences. And you accuse Milli of playing word games. :roll:

[milli360]

Musashi:
I thought you were warned before you made that statement. Is this a new warning? I guess that was a nifty way for you to insult people without any consequences. And you accuse Milli of playing word games.
I don't play word games.

At least, not that kind.

[Tensor]

Musashi:
I thought you were warned before you made that statement. Is this a new warning? I guess that was a nifty way for you to insult people without any consequences. And you accuse Milli of playing word games.
I don't play word games.

At least, not that kind.

Scrabble anyone?

[milli360]

Tensor:
Scrabble anyone?
Everybody knows that Scrabble is not a word game! :)

[Anonymous]

soupdragon2 wrote:

“OK. Apologies for the ad hominem, but I'm not their biggest fan all the same.”

I doubt that anyone expects you to be a fan. (of Shermer or Randi) I’m pretty sure that most would be satisfied with an example of why you believe that they should be considered lightweights and deserve contempt in the form of having a ‘finger’ thrown at them. Tossing off an obviously insincere apology probably doesn’t help either. You demonstrate that insincerity here:

“Given that some people make a lot of money out of pseudo-science, it seems only fair that they should be allowed to indulge in pseudo-skepticism.”

You’ve simply re-stated your original position with different words. In your first unwarranted and unprovoked attack, you accused Shermer and Randi of being contemptuous lightweights and with your second volley you accuse them of being ‘false’ skeptics.

In both instances you failed to provide any reasoning or evidence which might justify these accusations.

I really am curious to hear why you believe that two pillars of the skeptic community should be considered ‘false’ skeptics. What definition of ‘skeptic’ are you using?

“You've yet to see the light!”

By all means, enlighten me.

[John Kierein]

Scrabble is not a word game.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/08/05/national2230EDT0803.DTL

[lyford]

My mom is still bugging me to see this...
So I went to the website and under the heading of Scientists: About the Interviews, Interviewees and Content of the Film, I found this: (http://www.whatthebleep.com/scientists/)
Ramtha. (www.ramtha.com) One of the great enigmas that scientists have studied in the last decade is Ramtha, a mystic, philosopher, master teacher and hierophant. His partnership with American woman JZ Knight, his channel, still baffles scholars.
Through a coherent system of thought that unifies scientific knowledge with esoteric knowledge of spirit, his students study biology, neurophysiology, neurochemistry and quantum physics. Like Bohm he declares that consciousness is the ground of all being. In his own lifetime 35,000 years ago he learned to separate his consciousness from his body, raise its frequency and eventually take it with him. He has been one of the few human beings to become an eyewitness to the seen, and, the unseen.
Uh-huh.

[Spacewriter]

Okay. We went to see this movie this afternoon.

It's thought-provoking and yes, there is the link to spirituality that others have mentioned.

There is a point when you read or study quantum physics where you do get this glimmering question about how far up the road toward philosophy and metaphysics you go before this isn't science anymore. I think this is the point the filmmakers wanted to explore.

I'm still working my way through "The Expanding Universe" so maybe I'm not qualified to talk my way through my gut feelings (so to speak) about this film.

It was interesting though.

[beskeptical]

Small world. I went to a peace vigil Thursday. Of all the conversations that could have occurred, the woman I talked most with, brought up the movie.

Ramtha, oh pleeease. This lady made millions duping fools. She just wiggled around and started talking in a stupid, clearly put on character. No real evidence of this character was ever presented. And, look how many people started believing. :roll: What a sad world we live in. Think how much good that money could have done besides make Ms Knight rich.

[Spacewriter]

Oh, I had to laugh when I saw Ramtha -- she came around to the campus when I was in grad school and I thought she was a pretty big piece of new age cheese even then. Everything she said in the movie boiled down to common sense stuff you should know (or could find out) for yourself. Great advice, but I don't think you need a 25,000 year old spook inhabiting your brain to help spout such advice. Her presence in the movie detracted from it.

There were some interesting points and pieces that jibe with quantum physics, but the way the moviemaker linked them to thought and self-knowledge and changes in physical systems seemed more gimmicky than needed to be.

I dunno... it was interesting; I came away with some interesting thoughts. but that's about it.

[Ravana]

Hmm... you make it sound like a Michael Moore movie, Spacewriter. Was he involved?

I, too, refuse to see this movie on the grounds that I am unwilling to provide its makers with my funds. Interesting to hear about, though.

Metaphysics is usually taken to be a branch of philosophy, by the way (at least, philosophers take it so... no offense intended by the "correction"). I think you were after "epistemology," another branch, when you said "philosophy." Epistemology, for those who are unfamiliar with it, is the branch dedicated to asking exactly the same question as the movie's title does... although it does tend to be worded somewhat differently in most seminars.

[ToSeek]

Epistemology, for those who are unfamiliar with it, is the branch dedicated to asking exactly the same question as the movie's title does...

along with "How the #$@! do we know it?" :D

[Ravana]

Yup.

[diggingdeeper]

1. In addition to the films three directors, there were actors and others involved in the production who are long time "students" of Ramthas' School of enlightenment.

2. A disproportionate amount of time was given in voice and film to Ramtha, Dr. Joe dispenza, and Miceal Ledwith.

3. Dr Joe Dispenza and Miceal Leadwith are both long time students and "appointed teachers at Ramthas' school of enlightenment (RSE)

4. Dr Joe Dispenza (the one who creates his day) has gone to court and testified that his teacher (ramtha) has told him that terrible times are coming and that he needs to protect his family. He also invested over $10,000.00 in an infamous scam that infected RSE and was touted by Ramtha as a vehicle to gain fabulous wealth and many of the schools membership lost substantial sums of money. Some lost their entire life savings.
This is the person who teaches the brain science in RSE.

5.Miceal Ledwith a clergyman with a rather dubious past (see http://unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=36&si=770458&issue_id=7565) is the one chosen by the film makers to be the theological spokesman. He is also the theologian in residence of RSE.
He also has been marketing several products within the school and its followers. Guess that could not have been done to easily in the Catholic church.

6. The following persons in the film have all spoken at RSE and sold books there.

Fred Allen Wolf
Dr Candice Pert
Amit Gotswami
John Haglin
Joe Dispenza
Miceal Ledwith
and of course the big guy himself, Ramtha

7. One of the scientists who was in the film and had never appeared at the school is Dr David Albert Professor and Director of Philosophical Physics at Columbia university.
He has stated in several venues that his views were totally misrepresented in the film. He claims that in over 5 hours of interviews he explained to the film makers why their concept of how Quantum Physics works has virtually no support in the scientific community.
He even called in to a radio program the director was on to discuss this and was cut off. The host of the show said this was done because it was "negative"
so much for no good or bad, that is unless it is convienent.

8. To date, there has been no response as to where the information which lead to the story about the indians not being able to see the ships of Columbus originated from. There appears to be no evidence to support this claim. In addition, the film mentioned "clipper ships" which were not even in existence at that time. Perhaps that is why they couldn't see them.

There were many more, but I will leave them for others. If anyone has any information to refute any of the facts laid out here, I will be more then willing to retract them.

They are relevant because of the deliberateness on the part of the film makers to keep certain facts unknown (ironically, it is I making the unknown know) and misrepresent others.

[lyford]

7. One of the scientists who was in the film and had never appeared at the school is Dr David Albert Professor and Director of Philosophical Physics at Columbia university.
He has stated in several venues that his views were totally misrepresented in the film. He claims that in over 5 hours of interviews he explained to the film makers why their concept of how Quantum Physics works has virtually no support in the scientific community.
been googling for more info on this -can't find anything- it would be a hoot to read. Any links?

BTW, welcome to the board, diggingdeeper!

[diggingdeeper]

1. In addition to the films three directors, there were actors and others involved in the production who are long time "students" of Ramthas' School of enlightenment.

2. A disproportionate amount of time was given in voice and film to Ramtha, Dr. Joe dispenza, and Miceal Ledwith.

3. Dr Joe Dispenza and Miceal Ledwith are both long time students and "appointed teachers at Ramthas' school of enlightenment (RSE)

4. Dr Joe Dispenza (the one who creates his day) has gone to court and testified that his teacher (ramtha) has told him that terrible times are coming and that he needs to protect his family. He also invested over $10,000.00 in an infamous scam that infected RSE and was touted by Ramtha as a vehicle to gain fabulous wealth and many of the schools membership lost substantial sums of money. Some lost their entire life savings.
This is the person who teaches the brain science in RSE.

5.Miceal Ledwith a clergyman with a rather dubious past (see http://unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=36&si=770458&issue_id=7565) is the one chosen by the film makers to be the theological spokesman. He is also the theologian in residence of RSE.
He also has been marketing several products within the school and its followers. Guess that could not have been done to easily in the Catholic church.

6. The following persons in the film have all spoken at RSE and sold books there.

Fred Allen Wolf
Dr Candice Pert
Amit Gotswami
John Haglin
Joe Dispenza
Miceal Ledwith
and of course the big guy himself, Ramtha

7. One of the scientists who was in the film and had never appeared at the school is Dr David Albert Professor and Director of Philosophical Physics at Columbia university.
He has stated in several venues that his views were totally misrepresented in the film. He claims that in over 5 hours of interviews he explained to the film makers why their concept of how Quantum Physics works has virtually no support in the scientific community.
He even called in to a radio program the director was on to discuss this and was cut off. The host of the show said this was done because it was "negative"
so much for no good or bad, that is unless it is convienent.

8. To date, there has been no response as to where the information which lead to the story about the indians not being able to see the ships of Columbus originated from. There appears to be no evidence to support this claim. In addition, the film mentioned "clipper ships" which were not even in existence at that time. Perhaps that is why they couldn't see them.

There were many more, but I will leave them for others. If anyone has any information to refute any of the facts laid out here, I will be more then willing to retract them.

They are relevant because of the deliberateness on the part of the film makers to keep certain facts unknown (ironically, it is I making the unknown know) and misrepresent others.

[lyford]

woah! deja vu!

[diggingdeeper]

sorry for the double posts I did not see that mine got on. I will try to get you some more links, which ones were you particularly interested in. some of the stuff can be viewed on either the what the bleep web site or Ramthas own web site. Other material can be found in some of Ramthas/JZs teaching though I woul not suggest running out and getting them. Let me know if you havge anything in particular you might want.

Also check this one:

http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/779.html

Other facts.
It is Ramtha that is known as "lord of the wind" Notice the films is made by Lord of the wind productions.

Word has it (soon to be proclaimed factual, as of now hearsay) William Arntz had given JZknight a substancial sum prior to the making of the movie. I am about to get documentation on this and determine if it was a gift, loan, or investment. In the case of it being an investment it would throw more light on the issue. I am not too good at math, but I am sure you all can check my math out.

If 1 million people end up seeing the film and 1% of them end up checking out Ramtha/JZknights "school " of enlightenment (lighten the wallet) that would be 10,000 persons. If 10% of those ended up being long time members they would end up spending between $25,000.00 -$100,000.00 a peice that is just for enrollment, not including Books, supplies, wine, and pipes and tobacco all of which is supposed to help rewire ones neuronet (the way they want!) that would translate into 25 million to 100 million dollars in JZS pocket. Not a peice of chump change!!

[diggingdeeper]

http://www.users.fast.net/%7Eszimhart/ramtha.htm

Lyford,
I hadn't read your post about your mom. You may just want to accompany her to see the film and discuss some of the discrepancies and veracity of the film makers. Unless she is a dyed in the wool ramster. then you should not necessarily force the info on her, simply let her know you have some should she ever want to have a look at it.

While it appears that the group is making an attempt to get younger members with this film, historically they have marketed to older persons getting close to retirement who have the time and disposable income.

Let me know what you think if you see it. Propaganda should be seen. Especially if one can identify it as such. It is sort of like being in a police station when the detectives come in in their street guise, you realize that you could never have picked them out as being law enforcement. If it is done well, anyone can be fooled. In fact, the most intelligent are the most easily fooled! The school undersands that is how it works and preys on the misconception that anyone who is involved with a group like this must be stupid when it is just the contrary.

[lyford]

Lyford,
I hadn't read your post about your mom. You may just want to accompany her to see the film and discuss some of the discrepancies and veracity of the film makers. Unless she is a dyed in the wool ramster. then you should not necessarily force the info on her
Thanks diggingdeeper. I think she's not really at too much risk, she just likes alot of the new agey style thinking. I don't expect her to go off the deep end, but this info sure puts a different light on the movie. Creepy!

I was interested in more info about the physicist who says he was misrepresented, Dr David Albert. Any links to quotes from him?

[diggingdeeper]

http://archive.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/09/16/bleep/index_np.html

Here is a link with a fairly lenghty review. You do not have to subscribe to read it just click for the day pass and do something else while they play the commercial.

I have also had a fairly lenthy conversation with Dr Albert about it. While he did sign a release (which the film makers did not even give him a copy of and I am sure gave them the right to do what they wanted with his interview) Since he is not really in the entertainment buisness he assumed that the project was as the film makers had presented to him which was that it was to be a film about the foundations of physics which he is quite well qualified to speak about. Once they asked a few questions, he immediately saw where they were going with it and spent the better part of 5 hours as nicely as he could and in many different ways explaining why thier ideas were not founded and why and the history behind the reasons why. When they left, he thought his chance at being a movie star was over as he thought they would never use his interview since it did not support their ideas, he thought that they might give him a small amount of time as a dissenting view, but never considered that they would take his comments and edit them in such a way as to make him sound as if he was supporting their views.

Scientists need agents!!!!

[Spacewriter]

There are a lot of wooly ideas in this film. It's been nearly a month since I saw it and I'm still having a hard time figuring out how they managed to take all that handwaving and make it seem plausible. The problem is that when you start to get into quantum mechanics and duality and so on there is a point where it can seem awfully close to metaphysics. I suspect that's where the filmmakers jumped across to metaphysics and haven't looked back except to appropriate a few terms from QM, etc. to make what they're doing seem scientific.

Still, the film was thought-provoking and once I put aside some of the obvious attempts to manipulate the science and the aforementioned wooly ideas, I could actually enjoy parts of it.

[diggingdeeper]

Hi Space,

Yes it can be hard to tell how it is done. Much like a magicians and misdirection. If you do not know where to look you may not see it, a far cry from saying if you don't know something you cannot see it.

In the editing process, if one follows closely, you will find that the edits go from the scientists to ramtha and or the other "teachers" of RSE in the film and that is where they carry the ball and bring you through a series of leaps of faith in a subtle wa throughout the film. This part was excellently done.

[Spacewriter]

ACtually my favorite part was the Polish wedding.

[Huntsman]

It's become the latest fad in many pseudo-scientific fields to use QM as an explanation for anything. To borrow words from a physicist I know:

Quantum mechanics is NOT a "Get out of Physical Laws Free" card!

Among the physics community, QM has very specific meanings and predictions. Most people never hear or read about QM; they hear or read about interpretations of QM. The whole "observer and observed" bit is an interpretation, and one that means something quite different from what most people think. It's also not generally given serious thought in the physics community. The statement basically boils down to "until you measure something you can make no statement as to what its values will be", combined with "the act of measurement on micro scales affects the object being measured."

Again, to borrow from a physicist with much more knowledge than myself, if anyone ever tries to say "QM says that..." ask for the math. If they don't have the math, then QM does NOT say that. EVERYTHING QM predicts is in its mathematics. Every solid application and implication of QM is expressed mathematically. IF they can't show the math, then it's not in QM.

Just my thoughts on the matter, and an effective argument (I think) against the "it's possible due to QM" argument that is often used by those with little understanding. Quite often, we as skeptics aren't well versed enough in it to counter these arguments effectively or convincingly. I know I was recently schooled on this myself, so I'm just sharing the love :)

[Celestial Mechanic]

Does it have a soundtrack of cheesy sitar music? I might waste my money on it if it has cheesy sitar music.

[Lurker]

Does it have a soundtrack of cheesy sitar music? I might waste my money on it if it has cheesy sitar music.
hmmm... not me... can I borrow your kopy after you have watched it?? :-k

[Celestial Mechanic]

hmmm... not me... can I borrow your kopy after you have watched it?? :-k
Oh, I wasn't thinking of buying it! It's in theaters right now. Of course, if the movie were exquisitely cheesy as a whole, along the lines of Plan Nine From Outer Space or The Horror of Party Beach or They Saved Hitler's Brain I might get the DVD when it comes out!
:D

[CharlesEGrant]

It's become the latest fad in many pseudo-scientific fields to use QM as an explanation for anything. To borrow words from a physicist I know:

Quantum mechanics is NOT a "Get out of Physical Laws Free" card!


I like to think of it this way: the fact that electrons do not behave like billiard balls does not imply that billiard balls do not behave like billiard balls.

[devilnuts]

Figure this is as good a place as any for my first post (seeing as it was this topic that brought me across this site).

Unfortunately, I had the misfortune of viewing this load of crap twice. A professor of mine recommended that we see it, so I did. Then about three weeks later he wanted us to see it and do a paper on it. I had to work to limit myself to only 5 pages and I will save you from having to read it all, so I will just post the important thoughts from it.

I saw a few posts on some of these, but I'll post on them anyway.

Emoto's "Message from Water" is a load of crap. It's interesting that when he shows water that has been subjected to bad or mean words or even heavy metal music (which everyone knows is bad) they aren't even water crystals that he photographed. Talk about comparing apples and oranges. And hasn't anyone ever told him that water crystals are never the same? You can freeze water from an identical source at the same temperature, from the same starting temperature and still obtain differing crystals. He might as well yell words at clouds just before it snows and observe the snowflakes.

The "DC Experiment" is a nice story, but oddly enough, you can not find any solid numbers for what they were supposedly trying to achieve. What kind of crime were they looking to reduce? The only numbers that I can find show that 1993 was one of the WORST years for crime in DC. So if the two months they did this experiment over actually did reduce crime, then the criminals came out of the woodwork after all the meditators left.

"The brain doesn't know the difference between what it sees and what it remembers." I think they could have played that soundbite a few more times in the movie. Of course, if it doesn't brainwash you after the first try, they will play it three more times, so don't worry. And there are only certain parts of the brain that activated during actual experience and memory or imagination. 'Parts' of the brain don't know the difference, but the rest of the brain does. Everytime I heard this hack say this I wanted to yell out, "Then why do I know the difference?" Just so the easily influenced in the theatre wouldn't fall into the propoganda.

It was filled with half truths and misleading statements. For example, the hypothalamus does not produce chemicals that control every bodily function. It allows the anterior pituitary to release hormones that affect things such as hair growth, sperm production, ovulation, metabolism, other glandular functions, and a number of other bodily processes, but the movie made it seems as if it releases chemicals that control our moods, actions, and emotions. Almost none of the hormones released can be consciously controlled by us yet they made it seem in the movie as if they all were.

They tried to use quantum physics to give credence to their crap. While I admit that quantum physics is merely a science of possibilities, those are still dealt with in a physical realm ruled by Newtonian laws. You see, the problem was that Newtonian physics dealt really well with the portion of the universe that we can percieve without the aid of instruments. However, once we start getting into really huge systems (i.e. universe) or really small (i.e. sub-atomic) classical physics breaks down. Therefore quantum phsyics was created (and still evolves) as a way to explain what scientists had observed.

Overall, I was extremely dissapointed. I consider myself scientific, spiritual, and metaphysical. This movie seemed to give anyone with the goal of combining all three a bad name by presenting someone's slant <cough> Knight <cough> to turn a dime.

[diggingdeeper]

E-mail me the paper when you are done and let me know your grade. I would like to see it.

Still digging.

PS the guy who created his day... "Dr" Joe dispenza, the chiropracter from Ramthas school...... he wa s confronted at a forum about the movie explaining what happens as a function of when brain cells go through cell division......someone in the audience had to remind him that brain cells do not divide! DUH......

[byronkatiefan]

My radar was tripped by JZ Knight and quirky things about the others. Please, WHICH ONE was the real physics professor... the one with the waterfall in the background who was all happy and says ponder that for awhile? or the guy who said if he gave up all his power positions he could do some research yet he kept his day job to feed his family?

which one was David Albert? The guy standing on the steps with the glasses? greek columns?

Anyway - why does "Ramtha" get the most angry and arrogant and finger pointing when talking about how arrogant and wrong it is for the church / religion to depict God as ... my paraphrasing, a judgemental God? seems the old "you spot it you got it" may apply there.

In retrospect I agree it is very JZ Knight slanted and has what I felt were some confused people in it, many of the speakers seemed to be to be in denial about things.

The water molecules - I would describe as ART - something with a message to influence our thinking or make us think - NOT science for God's sakes... hey is that a funny juxtaposition, God and science? Anyway to call the water molecules stuff real is silly - it's a hoax unless in my opinion you call it just something like performance art.

I am not a scientist, in fact I am a consumer of self improvement services. However I get triggered negatively by BS... BS where people babble some scientific words then hook them to a conclusion or some BS supposedly profound statement like "THE The the the... ULTIMATE ate ate te.... OBSERVER erver erver erver...."

Give me solid usable tools like http://www.TheWork.org/ - whose founder explicitly denies guruness and gives services - including scholarships to her schools - constantly - has NO recruitment machine and where the process to do it for yourself is transparent and simple. You don't need me she says - and all her recordings say you can copy them for friends or spread them around so long as you don't charge.

Another I like is http://www.ImagoRelationships.org - again just solid tools and process one can learn for their own life.

Both are spiritual. I am disappointed to find the commercial tie-in to a guru with What the Bleep - a really pretty well produced movie with nice special effects, music... some good lessons like the visual demonstration of people's IV bags representing addictions of different types to brain chemicals produced by emotional states.... or open your mind to more possibilities... great.

"Ramtha" to me holds too much power for herself and if I were guessing from all the DID (Dissociative Identity Disorder) friends I have - was abused as a child involving religious figures, thus creating his/her alternate personalities. That is pure BS on my part as I know nothing of Ramtha. DID people I know are brilliant, have fascinating various people living in them, but cannot be held up as gurus superior to the inner wisdom in each of us.

I think for those that create their days - they don't need omens or signs that things are going the way they wanted - living in the mystery - good - constantly asking for reassurance that there really are miracles in order to keep yourself willing to keep trying to make your day go the way you planned... not for me. They happen - I think they are cool - and while I visualize positive stuff I want to be a part of - I also leave outcomes open and go with the flow.

On seeing WTBDWK for the second time - I gained what for me was an important insight - tho it may not have been one they intended at all :) --- Instead of "we are all ONE" - I thought "we are each ONE of the potentials" .. of the big ... ONE. So even if we are all unified in some sense - maybe our individuation represents the infinte potential different possibilities that this ONE can be and do etc.

It was all worth it... its just disappointing to note the tie-ins that are kind of hidden agenda stuff. The lead actress tho - love her and AWESOME JOB!

- BKF