Oh, one other thing. This movie was produced in association with the "Ramtha School of Enlightenment." Check out their web site here. Maybe that kind of new age stuff is your thing, but it isn't science.
What the &*%# (bleep) do we know?
by Navigator 46 Replies latest social entertainment
-
-
MegaDude
Mulan,
I'm with you on the channeler. Good points about the Aztecs and the Spanish.
Doc,
I simply would have to see the film again to catch the point about the ships being invisible even though they were plainly seen.
As to my experiences I have no explanation I can prove. But these things have happened more than once, and they happen to a number of people, so I believe there is a natural process at work. Nothing mystical about it.
If you actually did affect your surroundings by "wishing intensely," then something else was at work that science doesn't understand
Agreed. But then "science" doesn't have an explanation for everything and is reluctant to investigate some things. And a review of the history of science and scientists will find a plethora of egotistical and delusional liars on par with the Gov. Body of Jehovah's Witnesses as well as brilliant people in search of pure truth. (See the book "A Short History of Almost Everything" by Bill Bryson, a book on the history of science and scientists)
-
drwtsn32
But then "science" doesn't have an explanation for everything
No one denies that. But science *does* know that quantum physics doesn't allow what was portrayed in this movie.
and is reluctant to investigate some things.
Yes, it doesn't investigate the supernatural or paranormal. That's the boundary of science; it only deals with naturalistic things.And a review of the history of science and scientists will find a plethora of egotistical and delusional liars on par with the Gov. Body of Jehovah's Witnesses as well as brilliant people in search of pure truth.
Well I will disagree with you there. Science weeds out liars and frauds very quickly. If a scientists makes a claim, other scientists demand proof for it so that they can reproduce the results. This doesn't compare at all to the Governing Body. -
MegaDude
I disagree on what you think science knows about quantum physics as portrayed in the film, although I would agree I don't with all the concepts expressed in the film. I think some of the concepts are plausible.
Science doesn't investigate the supernatural or paranormal. That's the boundary of science; it only deals with naturalistic things.
Naturalistic? Disagree. What is supernatural at one time is naturalistic in another time.
Well I will disagree with you there. Science weeds out liars and frauds very quickly.
Well, my reading tells me otherwise.
-
drwtsn32
I think some of the concepts are plausible.
Which concepts? I don't remember every point this movie tried to make... mostly just the things I thought were ridiculous. I could be forgetting about things I would agree are plausible.
What it boils down to is quantum effects are not manifested on large (macroscopic) objects. For example: at the quantum level things may appear or disappear, but that isn't true with macroscopic objects. The filmmakers will guilty of trying to apply quantum principles in ways that don't make sense.
Naturalistic? Disagree. What is supernatural at one time is naturalistic in another time.
Yeah, I can't disagree with that. Maybe I should have described it differently: Science only deals with theories that can be falsified or tested in some manner. The christian God is a perfect example of something supernatural and something that science cannot test. There is simply no way to falsify the "theory" that he exists. You cannot prove that he doesn't exist!Well, my reading tells me otherwise.
Interesting read. I agree with most things he said, and it is disturbing when science is 'corrupted' by people with some sort of agenda.. political or otherwise. Sad.In that article he called SETI a religion. I saw the point he was trying to make, but I disagree that it's a religion in the same sense Christianity is. SETI is a logical attempt to test a theory extrapolated from previously known facts (we evolved on this planet, so why not other intelligent life?). In addition, it has the chance of being proven with cold, hard data. Can the same be said for Christianity? How can we ever hope to prove God's existence with gold, hard facts?
I supposed 20 years ago, he would have called the search for planets outside our solar system "a religion." There was no indication that other planets existed. No proof whatsoever. It was just a scientific guess; an extrapolation from previously known facts (our sun has several orbiting satellites, why not other stars?). Well now we have cold, hard proof of planets orbiting other stars.
His points about global warming, nuclear winter, etc., are spot on. Those are just guesses. Science simply has no real data to go off of here. When science tries to guess, that's where consensus comes in handy. I agree with him though; true science shouldn't NEED a consensus. And sure enough, it doesn't on most things. But when science delves into areas where they have to guess, they are useful.
Should science avoid areas where they have to "guess"? I don't think so. There are just so many things we want answers to. Take nuclear winter: We want to know what would happen if hundreds of nuclear bombs went off. Any answer to this is just a guess, but it's better than not thinking about it at all.
Personally I take what science says about such things with a grain of salt. Nuclear winter, global warming, second hand smoke, etc., ... those things are still highly debated. When I said that "science quickly weeds out liars and frauds," I guess I meant in areas that are more straight forward to test. Not on issues that are highly debated and are mostly guesswork.
Again, that was an interesting article. Thanks for pointing it out!
-
Leolaia
I was very skeptical of the claim about the Spanish. What is the documentary source of this claim? And who made it? I find it doubtful, if it is indeed based on a genuine source, that is came from something written from the native American point of view. Or is it a Spanish source that interpreted how the Indians reacted to them?
Also no such story exists for the native Hawaiians regarding their first encounter with Captain Cook. They described how strange looking the foreigners were and how their language was babble. And to them, the ships looked like little floating islands. The Hawaiian word for "ship" is the same word for "island".
-
Mulan
I don't remember the water thing...it's been a while since we saw this movie.
It was about photography of water molecules that had been assigned different emotions. I likened it to talking to plants, something I believe in. The water that was told "love", looked beautiful, like a delicate whitish snowflake. Another was "I hate you. I am going to kill you". That one was all distorted and yellow and black.
-
frankiespeakin
When I got back from watching the movie about a month ago I did a search on the net on some of these people and they seemed to belong to the same group some TM group (not sure). So I took the movie with a grain of salt.
But I still think even though the movie had an agenda, and they were clearly biased, that the pionts they were making has some basis in phsyics. After all don't most Physists feel that the universe is non-local. That being the case any speculation as to what non-local means reality is, is just speculative thoughts that can not hope to expressed what is true in our language(acurately). If reality is non-local then anything you say about it with human language is wrong.
-
Mulan
I see your point, frankiespeakin.
When I saw JZ Knight was one of the "experts".............actually the "ancient warrior, Ramtha, channeled by her", I lost a lot of my enthusiasm for the presentation. I would not call him/her credible, no matter which of them was speaking. Too weird for me.
Some of it was repetition of things I've learned in numerous motivational seminars, over the years,and I have put those things into practice, and have seen them work. I accept them as being true, like the way we talk to ourselves and the outcome.
All in all, there has to be a willingness to believe I guess.
-
MegaDude
Hey Doc,
If you liked that speech you'd like Michael Crichton's biography "Travels."