Thorough debunking of that shlock "What The Bleep Do We Know?"

Category: Entertainment & Pop Culture

Page Bottom ↓

324 friends
1410 reviews

12/18/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:

What the bleep has really taken the community by storm!
and the ability to control our surroundings with our thoughts is definitely understandable (whether you define this in terms of "manifestation" or just being practical about pursuing your goals)

When I watched "what the bleep" I found myself wondering about the experiments that were given as examples, and the experts. The crime rates dropping with meditation, and crystals forming based on the words used on their bottles.

After doing a little research... more than a few interesting things popped up. first, here's some really interesting information on a large percentage of the experts, which one blogger sums up nicely:

---------------------------

David Albert is the physicist from Columbia University. He talks in little snippets about quantum mechanics in the film. Here's what he has to say about the movie:

"I was edited in such a way as to completely suppress my actual views about the matters the movie discusses. I am, indeed, profoundly unsympathetic to attempts at linking quantum mechanics with consciousness. Moreover, I explained all that, at great length, on camera, to the producers of the film ... Had I known that I would have been so radically misrepresented in the movie, I would certainly not have agreed to be filmed. "

John Hagelin also talks quite a bit. It turns out that he is a leader in the Natural Law Party, which is a front for the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, which is so loopy that even Pat Buchanan's fans are spooked by his attempted involvement in the Reform Party.
(http://www.trancenet.o...)
(http://www.buchanan.or...)

Jeffrey Satinover, a doctor who also talks quite a bit, turns out to be involved in "curing" homosexuals, and according to an essay on his website believes

"What it comes down to is that liberalism causes brain damage. Liberals are not just unwilling to engage in rational thought, they are, after just so long, incapable of it."

http://www.pathinfo.org/
http://www.satinover.c...
http://www.satinover.com/

Michael Ledwith resigned his position as a monsignor in the Catholic Church, either because he started ranting about Jesus' twin brother or because he was caught sexually abusing children, it's hard to know which.
http://www.network54.c...

----------------------------

ok... so there's a few questionable experts... but it's all justified for the message... right!?
well, then it becomes a question about where the message is coming from. It turns out that one of the experts is JZ Knight, a 58-year old woman who's made a living channeling a 35,000 year old Atlantean spirit warrior named Ramtha.
It turns out that the film's producers, writers and a number of the experts are members of the Ramtha School of Enlightenment. JZ Knight also holds a copyright on the spirit "Ramtha" that she channels.

- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/18/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
Without really knowing it, I've watched a film specifically designed to promote Ramtha's (ramthian?) beliefs. Now I'm not opposed to following someone's beliefs, but how can I not be suspicious with the way this was presented?
I've watched a movie claiming to debunk the concept of all other religions, which maintains a $2 million dollar compound in Yelm, Wash. for the purpose of conducting classes for the followers of Ramtha, and are we not supposed to think at all about this being their version of a religious belief? All the experts are presented without any discussion of their connections with Ramtha, or the entire creating force of the movie being Ramthian followers.

in addition 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, Ramtha

http://Salon.com has a wonderful expose on this aspect of the movie, saying the movie could easily be interpreted as a full-blown infomercial for Ramtha. When criticized that the money for Bleep came from Ramtha, the creators ignored the implication that the followers of ramtha helped with the money, and instead issued this quote, which I actually love:
"Ramtha did not fund this film, as Ramtha does not have. a bank account or a Social Security number"

ok, so next time I'll be specific and say "the followers of Ramtha funded this movie to promote their interests, and Ramtha can claim a lack of responsibility since Ramtha does not actually do the accounting for the Ramtha School of Enlightenment"
how does that sound?

here's a link to http://salon.com's article on the subject
http://dir.salon.com/s...

before I forget... I also read some interesting information on the 3 scientific proofs.
1. There appears to be no source for the story about the Indians literally not being able to see Columbus's ships.

2. The "Maharishi Effect" was an experiment in 1993 about the drop in violent crime in DC during a two month period of meditation. There were a number of problems with this experiment including that the murder rate actually rose. It was discovered later that ALL the members of the "independent scientific review board" were followers of the Maharishi, and the experiment has never been independently replicated.

3. For the formation of crystals in certain shapes in response to a word on the bottle, or music being played, what the filmmakers don't tell you is that for each type of crystal, Emoto takes 50 samples, and then spends (hours, days?) browsing through each of them for the one that looks right based on the word he selected. From Emoto's website: " we look at a sample of water 50 different times and take photographs when the right image appears"
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/18/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
It sounds like an art project at this point. here's a link to the wikipedia, and emoto's site where he goes through and explains how he chooses the crystals he likes:
http://en.wikipedia.or...
http://www.masaru-emot...

once again, no one has been able to reproduce any of these results.

So does the science even matter!? If the message is so encouraging to so many people, what does it matter if science is being misrepresented, or what the direction is that we are being encouraged to go?
It turns out that Ramtha seems to be against regular medical prevention. In the same way that Marlee Matlin throws out her drugs at the end of the movie, Ramtha followers are encouraged to heal themselves with their minds instead of seeking medical help. This isn't applied just to depression, but medical conditions, dental care, and... AIDS! (JZ Knight's husband died of AIDS while being encouraged that he could completely heal himself in the same methods described in the film)
Here's an excerpt about one followers dental experience:

"Another former student... spent hours every day following the school's disciplines--focused breathing, meditation, and concentrating on a list of positive thoughts, such as I am fabulously wealthy, I am radiantly healthy, I am 20 years younger, I never age. She believed that she could heal her own illnesses by generating a high-frequency force field where decay could not survive. If she got sick, she thought it was because she wasn't disciplined enough.
Then, one day, she developed a toothache. She went to the dentist for the first time in 10 years and had to get two teeth extracted."
(http://www.wweek.com/s...

So after doing a little research, I'm not skeptical about my ability to shape my life by pursuing goals, but how can I not be skeptical about the way it's represented here?

I just found it interesting that a movie purporting the outdatedness of the world's religious beliefs was ready to jump in with their own copyrighted religion, which is of course newer, better and based on physics!

original thread on tribe...
http://bm.tribe.net/th...
- 368 friends
- 275 reviews
12/18/2006 J "overgrown with summer foliage" A. says:
hey michael, what about debunking the master cleanse as well??? It's amazing to me how people do things to their bodies that is basically starvation and dehydration combined.
- 414 friends
- 3 reviews
12/18/2006 Poe "stupid hairy bitch" T. says:
Wha? Micahel, you just gave me a headache and now I have to take nap.
- 97 friends
- 177 reviews
12/18/2006 Cris "Sputchman" L. says:
I saw the trailer for this movie and decided I don't need to see it. The 3 minutes of the trailer were enough to convince me of the idiocy of this movie. Thanks for confirming my judgment.
- 58 friends
- 81 reviews
12/18/2006 Robyn E. says:
where's the discussion on the rest of the movie? you know, the other 96%?

;-)

where ya at, michael? personally I like the aspects referring to the quantam particles and how they change the theories behind the structure of atoms? ... string theory, anyone?

(nice research on that Ramtha business... odd stuff)
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/18/2006 K O. says:
the whole point is that you have to believe in it for it to work just like everything in life. A very good friend of mine is one of Ramtha's teachers. They are not asking you to follow them. These teachers want you to start thinking about the possibility of it all.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/18/2006 K O. says:
oops I mean my friend is a student of Ramtha.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/18/2006 K O. says:
Ramtha was in it for such a short time. This movie was not promoting her. She does not need to be promoted nor does she want to.
12/18/2006 KayJay .. says:
I haven't seen it yet. Was that a play by play recap? Crib notes? Shall I print all that out?
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/18/2006 K O. says:
you should see it. quantum physics is way ahead of our time. my favorite message is our reality being changed by our thoughts.
- 58 friends
- 81 reviews
12/18/2006 Robyn E. says:
michael's initial posts are interesting, yes--- BUT

they have little to do with the movie. LITTLE.

right on, K.O.!
- 97 friends
- 177 reviews
12/19/2006 Cris "Sputchman" L. says:
Quantum theory is so difficult to understand because it is so far out of our normal experience. Nothing macroscopic behaves like fundamental particles. So quantum mechanics sounds like magic and is susceptible to misinterpretation. No, scrap that. It is misinterpreted by most people. Even most physicists don't understand it.

And thus it is really easy to come up with some new-agey idea and wrap it in quantum mechanic "science". Reality being changed by our thoughts??? Come on! Wishes coming true? Keep on dreaming!

The trailer sounded like bullshit. I cannot imagine the pain of having to sit though an hour and a half of bullshit at that level.

Sorry to be this harsh. I'm usually very open to new ideas and metaphysical things. But I just can't stand people selling their bullshit as science, or warping science to prove their ideas.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
Except that the scientists have come out and suggested extreme distaste with the editing performed in a way to bastardize everything they were saying... or have an agenda the whole time!

The filmmakers assembled a panel to make their point by discussing some facts, many opinions, and imaginative examples in ways designed to inform as well as entertain. Critics have voiced concerns that the film is disingenuous and that it selectively presents information while not presenting contradictory information. The most severe criticism of this film is that the ideas and theories presented are based upon the beliefs of JZ Knight, a medium who claims to channel a Lemurian warrior Ramtha who raised an army and fought against the Atlantians over 35,000 years ago.

The film presents information given by people who support the film's underlying philosophy, but, by and large, those people have previously been involved in promoting similar ideas. Arguably, their presence in the film represents the filmmaker's efforts to find people who are sympathetic to the film's ideas and largely the people in the film do not represent the general scientific community's views since they do not use the scientific method in their experiments nor do they present their experiments in peer reviewed journals.

David Albert, a professor and the director of the Philosophical Foundations of Physics program at Columbia University states that the film completely misrepresented his views.

Dr. Joseph Dispenza is a teacher at Ramtha's School of Enlightenment as is Amit Goswami, Mgr. Miceal Ledwith, and JZ Knight, who claims to channel R
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
Like some other films, the film does not present any contradictory evidence or discuss any contrarian point of view, nor does it discuss the process of how certain conclusions were reached.

Ideas which have little acceptance in the mainstream scientific community are portrayed as fact, despite many of them being contradicted by evidence. Many identified as scientists in the movie provide evidence from experiments that were carried out improperly or without due consideration of error propagation, casting serious doubt on the results.

[edit] Statements about quantum physics

Most importantly, a most essential point about quantum mechanics is bypassed in this movie. Quantum mechanics deals with small systems, and quantum effects (especially Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) are applicable only to matter on the scale of the de Broglie Wavelength. The movie exploits these effects by falsely implying that they (especially a wavefunction associated with an object and probability calculations concerning this object) are applicable to everyday objects, e.g. basketballs, humans, or fountains.

As the purported experts speak throughout the movie, they make several references to concepts, ideas, and alleged facts about quantum physics and other specific items. However, few of the scientists involved are actually professional physicists doing research in quantum mechanics, and one of those that does do such research, David Albert, has complained that his views were deliberately misrepresented.[1]

The movie also fails to explain precisely how the theory of quantum mechanics actually proves any of the mystical or religious teachings found in the film. Statements from physicists are made which are then intercut with statements from medical doctors, people who have created their own religion, and others. No logical argument connecting the findings of quantum mechanics with the movie's core message is offered.

Most of the film's claims about quantum mechanics are wildly inconsistent with what physicists have discovered from quantum mechanics. The idea that the measurement (observing capacities) of conscious observers creates reality is implied to be a widely held position in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics. However, the movie's interpretation of this position is far from what most physicists actually believe.

Some of the film's experts, particularly Amit Goswami, repeatedly refer to the process of measurement and observation in quantum mechanics and speculate about the relation between consciousness and the material world. They claim, for example, that human beings have the capability to create their own reality; Dr. Miceal Ledwith even asserts that human beings have the capability of walking on water. Evidence is not offered.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
In contrast, physicists do not believe this ability to freely choose the future to be true in anything other than a metaphorical sense. The facts of measurement and observation are far more prosaic. Specifically, if a system is in a state described by a wave function, the measurement process affects the state in a non-deterministic, but statistically predictable way. In particular, after a measurement is applied, the state description by a single wave function may be destroyed, being replaced by a statistical ensemble of wave functions. The nature of measurement operations in quantum physics can be described using various mathematical formalisms such as the relative state formulation or its equivalent form the many-worlds interpretation. Noted physicists such as David Deutsch do take this interpretation quite literally.

However, some see the many-worlds interpretation as supporting the view that we, in some sense, 'choose' from an infinite ensemble of possible universes. (Note however that David Deutsch himself rejects any such extrapolation of his views.)

Physicist Heinz Pagels, in The Cosmic Code, writes:

Some recent popularizers of Bell's work when confronted with Bell's inequality have gone on to claim that telepathy is verified or the mystical notion that all parts of the universe are instantaneously interconnected is vindicated. Others assert that this implies communication faster than the speed of light. That is rubbish; the quantum theory and Bell's inequality imply nothing of this kind. Individuals who make such claims have substituted a wish-fulfilling fantasy for understanding. If we closely examine Bell's experiment we will see a bit of sleight of hand by the God that plays dice which rules out actual nonlocal influences. Just as we think we have captured a really weird beast---like acausal influences---it slips out of our grasp. The slippery property of quantum reality is again manifested.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
That's just from wiki, but I can go back and find my own too!

Just because it sounds cool, and gives us hope, and makes life as magical as we hope it could be....

well.. it doesn't mean that it makes any sense at all.

Again... rent Fritjof Capra's Mindwalk or read his novella "The Turning Point" for a really good discourse.. basically between a physicist, poet, and politician. Much more in depth...

AND REAL!

It is fun to watch things that are fake, but real stuff is super cool too guys!
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
Anyone who understands Quantum Mechanics hasn't studied it long enough
-- Richard Feynmann

Seriously... anyone making suggesting they understand Quantum Mechanics will have history judging them as silly ignoramus'.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
Upon further investigation I find the films' producers, writers, directors, and a number of the featured "experts" are members of the Ramtha School of Enlightenment. The film is a propaganda piece for a cult.

What the (Bleep) Were They Thinking?

I can answer that now. They were thinking that if they made a film using the word "quantum" a lot, plus plenty of feel-good drivel they would (a) make a ton of money (not that they are short of the stuff), and (b) gain more recruits to their loony-tunes cult. This is probably one of the few things they got right.

References

Some further reading if you're interested. First a good expose of the film as infomercial for Ramtha, by http://Salon.com.

A site with masses of information about Ramtha.

A blog with information about some of the talking heads.

A blog with some comments about Hagelin. Read the comments section.

An amusing review of the movie by Orkut Media.

CSICOP's review of the film.

Skeptic Magazine's review of the film.

A really good explanation of the real science involved, as opposed to the fanciful "what The Bleep" version of it.
- 109 friends
- 131 reviews
12/19/2006 Mori "moshi moshi" Y. says:
So, if Ramtha and Xenu got into a fist fight, who would win?
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
http://skeptico.blogs....

links from the above post in the link.... GREAT ARTICLE.. BTW...
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
http://www.googlefight...

Xenu... by a huge margin.
- 50 friends
- 50 reviews
12/19/2006 Ardit B. says:
I saw that movie in google video, and i thought it was crap. I did minor in physics, and have had it a huge passion about it since 5th grade, and I read physics books all the damn time, and most of the things those guys were saying were bull.

I still remember the part when they say that Indians could not see the Colombo's ships, as they were not trained to. -- hmmm, pretty much a saying that should come from a mouth of a cult.

Are these guys trying to be the next scientology?!?
- 97 friends
- 177 reviews
12/19/2006 Cris "Sputchman" L. says:
Feynman is the man.
Anyone that can get as far ahead in science, while still having time to socialize and create art, is a true Human. Feynman had a great sense of humor on top of that.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
Energy of an atom. Everything is made up of atoms so wouldn't it make sense that our energy effects that. I get lot more out of life when I am positive. I am more productive when I am focused on what I can do not what I can't do. Who taught us that anyway? Doesn't that have to do with not being encouraged to live to our fullest potential. If I live off of fear, success, love, anger, happiness I will invite this into my life and inadvertently make it happen. I am very sensitive to other people. Positive or negative it can be very contagious for me.
- 97 friends
- 177 reviews
12/19/2006 Cris "Sputchman" L. says:
I'm confused, KO. What does your feelings have to do with atoms?
- 50 friends
- 50 reviews
12/19/2006 Ardit B. says:
Yes. But you are sliding on a slipery slope where everything is an energy.

We yet don't know much about our universe, and scientist are trying not only explain, or thoritize, but actually prove what are we made of.
Things like the CERN atomic particles are made to really understand the sub-atomic space, which is till a big puzle.

These guys just are just profiting by our relative ignorance, by giving some thoughts and solutions which don't help us at all in understading what we really made off. These guys are the charlatans of the scientific community. Probably did too much pot and f ucked up their brains with LSD, and know they come as solvers of the misteries of the universe, and mankind.

CONS.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
How can anyone be right if we don't even know what space is in between an atom.
- 97 friends
- 177 reviews
12/19/2006 Cris "Sputchman" L. says:
It must be late. This conversation does not make any sense to me any more.
- 97 friends
- 177 reviews
12/19/2006 Cris "Sputchman" L. says:
What do you mean by "what space is in between an atom"?

No, we cannot imagine what an atom looks like, because protons and electrons and neutrons are particles that behave very differently than macroscopic objects (baseball balls). They are much, much, much smaller than the wavelength of visible light, so we cannot see them. They are not solid balls. You cannot make that analogy.
- 97 friends
- 177 reviews
12/19/2006 Cris "Sputchman" L. says:
But we do have some equations that help us predict how they will react and behave.

But anyhow, how come nobody can be right? If I say I'm going to bed right now, I know I'm right.
- 50 friends
- 50 reviews
12/19/2006 Ardit B. says:
"How can anyone be right if we don't even know what space is in between an atom." Yes. We don't still know what exactly is. We know some of the sub-atomic particles such as quarks, quazars, etc... Hence things like this huge particle accelerator are being built, to learn more about the sub-atomic world:
http://public.web.cern...

Things like this cost money, and huge man power, but at least the scientific community is trying to understand.

These guys are the typical COUCH pseudo-scientists that just "know" the solutions. Humanity can't achieve progress with people like this drumming their backwards theories.

While people should be open to new theories, and explanations, they should be backed with facsts, and or things we can observe.
Their are just like pseudo church-scientists back in the day would clame earth was flat, and the center of the universe.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
I am talking about synchronicity. Funny Cris. You can make that happen.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
"You can make that happen" I mean about you being tired and right about being tired. Ugh I am going to shut up now.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
K.O. - what you just said was another reason the Police have totally bastardized and retarded the concept of synchronicity.... good pop culture reference tho...

I am tired. And I have been boozin'.. so I will say this...

CRIS! Have you ever read "surely Mr Feynmann, you must be joking" or any of his other books?

The stories about the safe cracking at los alamos is out of control hilarious.

He was mischevious. He was curious. He was one of the top three most intelligent men of the 20th century... and more people know britney spears. ugh.

He is sort of a hero... so if you like a chat... let's do it here..~ =)
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
Oh geez thanks for the insult followed by a compliment. Are you one of those people who always has to be right? So one sided.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
no silly.. I was right where you were at... following the argument until the two of you were agreeing that we are all tired.

I wanted to keep going where I was going, but also hung up on the conversation.

So predictably hypocritical!

that is what you get from a tired person!
- 403 friends
- 248 reviews
12/19/2006 Sav "super liberal" B. says:
Ok that's it. I'm seeing it tomorrow
12/19/2006

This Yelper's account has been closed.
- 97 friends
- 177 reviews
12/19/2006 Cris "Sputchman" L. says:
Michael, of course I've read Feynman's stories. He's my role-model. Except the time for me to do something Nobel-worthy is running out...

I thought it was fabulous, the way he just made a wild guess pointing at the construction plans he had no idea how to read. Then the engineers went "oh, yes, that's where the problem is. You're a genius!". I love that attitude.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
Don't they also recommend that book "surely Mr Feynmann, you must be joking" to manipulate and seduce women?
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
I want to read that book. So I can learn how to hypnotize people. JK
- 103 friends
- 227 reviews
12/19/2006 Mike "UranusDeMilo" W. says:
Don't dis the Feynmann book :-) There are pearls of wisdom with it.

But that bleep movie? One of my clients *insisted* that I watch it. I wasn't impressed....in the slightest.
- 97 friends
- 177 reviews
12/19/2006 Cris "Sputchman" L. says:
No, not really. One of his stories is about this couple that would take a girl home with them regularly. They recommended him to, instead of buying a girl drinks at the bar, which inevitably ends with her having fun with someone else, he be more of an asshole, tell her he's not going to buy her a drink unless she sleeps with him, etc. He tried it once and it worked. But he didn't like being that way, so he went back to his old ways.

This, by the way, agrees with what "dating guru" David Deangelo teaches: http://www.doubleyourd.../ . But that's something for a different thread...
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
RealDMichaelC... ho ho ho... boy.

That made me laugh out loud. Me bad person.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
Oh, the orginal "neg"
- 209 friends
- 234 reviews
12/19/2006 James M. says:
Michael, thanks for bringing this topic up. . .I can't get into the discussion at the moment because I'm running out the door but I will say, I thought the movie was amazing.

I loved it. The message I got from the movie is that people are all very powerful with what we have inside, our soul. We can use our thoughts and emotions for positive or negative. Okay, that is a very VERY simple commentary i know. Anyone who is interested in science and spirituality should check it out.

I'll be back to this thread later when I return. . .
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
Watch Mindwalk, read The Turning Point... both Fritjof Capra's work.

It is about a poet, physicist, and politician philosophizing on mt st michelle...

it is real, it is solid... and it isn't scientifically poetic language masquerading utter nonsense.

If you dig science and spirituality... get into stuff that represents it properly... without charlatans proselytizing about their cult like, poorly conceived of, beliefs....
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
Wow!!!! What a thread! What I learned:

1) Science is easily misunderstood and misrepresented.
2) "What the Bleep Do We Know" has sure got a lot of people talking and thinking.
3) Lots of people still hunger for a magical universe, and now hope that science can deliver it, after Nietsche's announcement of God's death.
4) Michael h really did an AWFUL lot of homework checking up on an obviously sloppy pseudoscientific, yet nonetheless popular movie.
5) Michael Feynmann is still the man.
6) When people get tired, people get cranky.
12/19/2006

This Yelper's account has been closed.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
We are all one but everythings random...
12/19/2006 Heidi A. says:
Yeah, and make a million dollars in a year, apparently.
12/19/2006

This Yelper's account has been closed.
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
Seriously though, I think K O and Lady J have got the movie's essential message: the way you think has a huge impact on the world YOU live in--you're own personal experience. This is a message that's been around a lot, from Epictus, to the Buddha, to the Vedics, to even modern psychological therapies. But obviously, it's a message that we need to hear again and again, and somehow make us really confront our basic assumptions of our life, our habits of thought, action, and relationship. The message invites us to expand our choices--even basic choices about what we think and what we do. And clearly the message needs to be packaged in a way that it get's in to us.
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
Clearly, the Ramtha-folks thought that science was the best way to help us swallow this pill, and so they offered up a buffet of science in a film chock full of animation, graphics, and special effects. But this was a craaazy buffet! Like Chinese, Southwest tex-mex, big chain hotel breakfast, & hippie vegan (loved that place in Burlington, VT) combined. Some of the science was okay, all was out of context, and the connections between the different scientific discussions were mostly preposterous. Simply put, most of the scientific discussions occurred at different levels--quantum level scales (very very small ( -10 meter power and smaller), molecular level (also very small), neuronal level (still pretty small), to anatomical (we can almost see this), to basketball levels. And then leaps of speculation (faith? inspiration? wishful thinking?) were taken between these levels to tell a story and lead us to a final conclusion where the protagonist dumps her psychiatric medication and lives happily ever after (until her next episode of whatever).

And the end conclusion, the radical notion that somehow, if we just believe hard enough, reality will shape to our deepest desires and intentions, is not only wrong-headed but dangerous and deeply unjust.

It's wrong-headed, because sometimes reality doesn't care what we think: you can be slipped poison without knowing about it, you can be hit by an asteroid, George Bush can be elected AGAIN despite all your wishing and praying, you can freeze to death in the Oregon wilderness no matter how much you love your family.

It's dangerous because you might make some stupid choices thinking that you can wish away any bad consequences if they happen. Plenty of people end up in the psychiatric emergency room because they think that they no longer need their meds, that JUST ONE hit of heroin won't hurt after all these years, that their girlfriend is suddenly evil and should now die. Suddenly stopping your medication for whatever condition is generally a bad idea if done without medical consultation. Invading Iraq without a post-war game plan is a bad idea. Just wishing and believing it will be different don't make it so.

It's unjust because if we take such ideas too seriously, we can end up blaming the victim-ourselves and others. All the bad things that happen to us end up being a result of deeply held beliefs that we haven't rooted out and changed yet. Did that woman get raped because she deeply believed she deserved to be? Did that man get cancer because he deeply believed that he was ill in some way, or unworthy, or not fully taking advantage of his life? If you haven't read Susan Sontag's Illness as Metaphor, run out and do it NOW. She talks about this last idea as it applies to how people's beliefs about cancer as some sort of punishment for wrong living get's in the way of proper treatment.
- 99 friends
- 192 reviews
12/19/2006 Jordan M. says:
I'm sorry. I didn't realize this movie needed debunking. It is so ridiculous that I can't imagine anyone would take it to be anything but a work of fiction.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
Leandro T. Your words are powerful. : )
- 209 friends
- 234 reviews
12/19/2006 James M. says:
Movie's, music, books. . .it's all out there as information. You can decide to take every word literal or you can pull out parts or a theme that works for you. I'm glad they made that movie because it makes people think about the bigger picture. Whether you agree or not with every single thing is not important but what is important is the dialogue that stems from it.

Jeff A. said something about people being morons who like the movie. . .(Jeff, if I read the post wrong, please let me know), I am not a moron but what I am is a person who likes to hear different views on the meaning of life, science, and spirituality. I'm interested in the human experience. The movie simply was a different view of that. Because I enjoyed the movie does not mean I take it all as the gospel or truth. Like I said before, what I got as the message is how we're all responsible for deciding what type of experience we want to have here in this lifetime. You can make it positive or negative, you have the power to manifest what you allow your thoughts and feelings to be, into your physical existence experience.

You're negative and hate life, you'll probably find daily physical existence to be more challenging. You appreciate what you have and choose to keep it more positive, you'll probably have a less challenging physical existence. Simple.

Some people don't realize they hold the power to make their life better. The power is nothing you can see but I suspect everyone on this thread already knows that.

= )
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
Interesting also is the concept of waking up and knowing exactly what and how your day is going to go because it is what you consciously make it.
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for exploring how molding your thinking can shape your life. I've found it helpful many times to confront some deep, deep beliefs and shift them. But it ain't easy to do. Simply attending to where you put your attention is tricky enough. Are you focusing on the negative that others (and you) say? Do you find yourself criticising more than complimenting? Are you quicker to see other's faults than merits? These are habits of thoughts that I've found can definitely color my day and are useful to notice.

But I don't think that just by thinking I'm going to change some fundamental things like gravity or the mess in Iraq or the melting ice caps. And science requires some healthy skepticism of claims, some empirical testing, and conversation with others who think scientifically.

Science isn't religion, isn't philosophy (though it has philosophical assumptions), it isn't a spiritual path (well, usually). It is one of the big meaning makers out there and so you got Ramtha followers trying to use science to prop up their ideas, you got creationists trying to shove intelligent design down our throats, you got politicians picking and choosing among science and scientists to justify their policies, you got advertising claiming science on the side of their products, you got Richard Dawkins acting like a raving, John the Atheist Prophet, because he realizes that science is being threatened by antiscientific religous fanatics with the upper hand with respect to political connections. For better or worse, science is one of the major ways that we collectively understand our world and our lives. And it challenges other world views. And it ain't always up to the big task--of giving meaning to our lives. That's why we get religion. And that's why I think "What the Bleep.." was so successful. We get the science justification to a juicy, spiritual world view that caters to our desire for a magical universe (secret: it still is, science or not!) and magical thinking, without spending much time on the nitty, gritty, dirty reality of the hard, hard work it sometimes takes to make your thoughts real.
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
Thanks Michael h for the topic! My juices have boiled like this in a while :)
- 209 friends
- 234 reviews
12/19/2006 James M. says:
"But it ain't easy to do. Simply attending to where you put your attention is tricky enough. Are you focusing on the negative that others (and you) say? Do you find yourself criticising more than complimenting? Are you quicker to see other's faults than merits? These are habits of thoughts that I've found can definitely color my day and are useful to notice. " - Leandro T. said. . .

So true. Great words.
- 90 friends
- 197 reviews
12/19/2006 CAKE E. says:
omg.. blah..blah...blah.
- 90 friends
- 197 reviews
12/19/2006 CAKE E. says:
i thought the movie was interesting. plus there's no big promo for this ramtha whatever it is blah, blah, blah. various other people believe that thoughts influencing reality.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
your thorough blah blah blah should be enough evidence, but it isn't.

The point is that this was used by the Ramtha camp as a exploitative, misrepresentative, and underhanded recruitment video for their cult.

The promo isn't overhanded, because they didn't want to make it an obvious advert. They simply used bad science and pretty thoughts to make the less critical of us feel "good" and "all good" with the complex world and systems around us.

KO.. there is a difference between a self fulfilling prophecy (you are what you make of the day), versus the absurd idea that you can alter the path of subatomic particles to the extent that you create your own reality.

Ugh... once you open up magic and credulous beliefs... like this quantum quackery....

you open yourself to anything... fairies, elves, the creatures from OG and Fraggle, shadow people... the fact that there are invisible people all around you, and the floating invisible spaghetti monster....

once you allow any form of nonsense to define your reality, it is like a floodgate of flim flam, charlatanism, and pseudoscience.

Those that believe in this stuff have spent a lot of money on books about immortality, spiritualism, and belief.

When you buy books or movies that uncritically and erroneously help comfort your world view, or support it so that it makes you feel good.. rather than find the truth...

all you are doing is padding the packets of scam artists and conmen.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
Lady J says
"Whether you agree or not with every single thing is not important but what is important is the dialogue that stems from it. "

the problem is the way it is set up... from the beginning they are completely misrepresenting the argument and facts...

It's the fallacy of slippery slope!
http://www.nizkor.org/...

the first moments of uncritical science negate the totality of the rest of the argument they have for it. it is all a lie!

the reason it worked as a cult training video???

it is an appeal to consequences of belief....
http://www.nizkor.org/...

just because it would suck if the world is a wonderfully orderly, and brilliantly complex part of a larger, yet static universe....

IT DOES NOT MEAN you get to make up magical and cool sounding stuff for fun... in light of that.
- 90 friends
- 197 reviews
12/19/2006 CAKE E. says:
and as for all of your comments michael:

your thorough blah blah blah should be enough evidence, but it isn't.
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
Cake E: Why join a convo just to be rude and dismissive?

Unfortunately, people have ended up in psychiatric emergency when they follow some of the ideas of this "interesting" movie.

Anyone thinking & paying attention for more than 30 seconds could have easily picked up the Ramtha connection-some of it is in the credits. Cults are scary. Cult propaganda is scarier, when unsuspecting people swallow it. And sometimes they get influential, even in politics. Look at Jonestown. Super influential right here in the Bay area, highly connected, then they fled to Guyana where everyone drank the Koolaid. And died.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
Cake can troll... cake can argue... but Cake sure as hell cannot have intelligent debate.

this much is clear... which makes me understand why Cake would buy into such a ridiculous concept like the film.
12/19/2006

This Yelper's account has been closed.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
It is a little bit like psychology 101. I like to think out of the box to understand some of the points they make. I also think people have selective hearing and selective vision. Which is another point they try to get across.
- 209 friends
- 234 reviews
12/19/2006 James M. says:
Jeff A., that is what I was trying to explain above but, you said it much better.
I totally agree.

K O, what you said above about selective hearing and vision, so true.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
Jeff and Lady J...

The difference is that you are talking about emotions and intellect altering our perception...

not squinting and concentrating and thinking you are literally manipulating the environment around you.

Self fulfilling prophecies of the human mind are not the same as magical reality bending....
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
True Michael. All true. And I've found your comments spot on.

But (you knew that was coming), the link between consciousness, perception and the actual experience of the world is stickier than most think. And there are plenty of cognitive neuroscientists and others who recognize that this funny thing called consciousness reaches out into the world just as much as the world pokes back into it. Check out "The Embodied Mind" coauthored by the late Francisco Varela and others. He was among a group of serious scientists who were looking at the mutual entailment of "world" and "mind" to put it simply.

Ugh. Okay enough academic speak. Yeah, I can't fly, because I'm not Nemo and this ain't the Matrix. I'm not turning water into pretty snowflakes when I'm happy and ugly snowflakes when I'm angry. I get your point about that and agree. But let's not dismiss emotion, belief, and intellect. Because for good and often for ill they all have very real impacts on the kind of world we live in.
- 90 friends
- 197 reviews
12/19/2006 CAKE E. says:
michael, it's hard to have an intelligent debate with you because you make so many assumptions. for one, you assume that i "bought into" all the ideas that were in that film. you saw it and apparently haven't so "bought into" those ideas. also, you talk about the inevitability of believing in fairies, and fraggles once one opens oneself to magic and "credulous beliefts" (whatever that is supposed to mean). what do you care what other people buy into, how they react to things? like with the whole kim family thread- y'know the issue that you just couldn't let go of because someone decidedc to censor you- you've shown that you are extremely narrow-minded and critical of other people. things aren't so black and white all the time, see leandro's comment above.
- 90 friends
- 197 reviews
12/19/2006 CAKE E. says:
as far as leandro's comment, i was quoting michael's remarks to me. and this was not opened as a conversation, it was opened as a long diatribe.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
Why is this about magic, cults and what not. How boring. The movie was more about Quantum Physics. That's what fascinates me.
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
Clearly there's some history here behind this particular thread. All I saw was some interesting info on the people behind the movie and how a scientist interviewed in the film felt about being taken out of context.

And this movie has been on my mind (after seeing it years ago), since I've had to recently help clean up after the mess when someone took it a bit too seriously. Not the filmmakers fault really, but it just feeds into my ire when science gets misused--by relgious fanatics, politicos, by scientists themselves.

For good or ill, science is the new big religion. Someone has got to watch the priests AND how people are using the priests words & rituals.
- 100 friends
- 75 reviews
12/19/2006 K O. says:
I don't think science should be a religion. For me it is gained knowledge to incorporate into the way I want to live my life. No shrine for science......yet : )
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
If you understood QM (I do not), they are manipulating the science of QM to sound like magic. It is about the need and will to believe.. so much so you bastardize the original science of the beauty of the natural theory...

If you took out the nonsense of QM that you are enthralled with..

The QM you are enthralled with is magic in every sense of the word. They have not represented QM *AT ALL*. It isn't narrow.. it is just true.

I care about what people buy into, when they aren't using their critical faculties to observe this planet around us... and when they believe in things that can actually hurt themselves or others. It is fine and dandy to believe in silly things... but when people adopt these false views of QM.. credulous people who *WANT* to believe in things... they can hurt themselves trying to fly, stop medical treatment, etc.... whatever... as soon as it effects more than the individual, it is everyone's business.

The problem is with something like this film.. you cannot pick and choose. The base, main point is INHERENTLY flawed, and totally misrepresentative of quantum theory...

so, anything past that point is a fallacious belief.

If the crux of the argument is invalid, all the other cool stuff becomes invalid... it removes the base of the argument so the rest comes tumbling down.

If you are picking one thing out of this movie as valid or worthwhile, you are acquiescing to your lack of knowledge about QM... and picking and choosing your beliefs based off of what you feel good about, rather than critically analyzing them. There is no debate about this film at all in the science communities, because it is not even considered something worth debating.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
SCIENCE.. is not a religion. Religion is dogmatic, authoritarian. Science is revisionistic and peer reviewed.

Like atheism.. it is *NOT* a belief. It is the *ABSENCE* of belief. The lack of belief means that WE CLAIM NOTHING... we aren't making erroneous or bizarre claims of how the universe may or may not work. We are just living.. using the evidence available... to try to comprehend how the world works.

Making assertions that the universe works in a way that also confirms and validates your world view is highly suspect. And a bit troubling... you believe what makes you feel warm and comfy, and someone else will believe what makes them warm and comfy...

and I don't believe for the sake of belief (at least too often)... and it teaches me the world is a wondrous, and beautiful place... that is lonely, cold, and scary... and that we need to rely on each other rather than fabricate false realties wasting everyone's time here.

It is only dogmatic if I am making a claim. I am saying that the claims made are dogmatic....you cannot turn around and critique me for being dogmatic because I am the rebuttal to the movie being dogmatic. It isn't dogmatism or narrow minded to have a chat.

And we are, unfortuantely, using critical thought that makes us *NOT* believe
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
If we could work in altars and ritualistic sacrifice, I might consider it, however....

and this only because I had to post that I didn't erase that last line... it was supposed to be that using critical thought gives us the absence of belief in those things.. that is all.

Serious about the altar tho.... fun IS fun
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
Okay, I was going to stop, but I think I've been misunderstood. I didn't mean that science is a religion literally. On this point, I'm looking at things more sociologically.

Ok, here it goes. First of all, SCIENCE is a big category. It includes the actual disciplines of investigation (biochemistry, theoretical physics, cognitive neuroscience, microbiology, etc) that fall within this category, as well as the body of knowlege accumulated by these disciplines. It includes the methods of investigation, as well as the social process of publishing, review, debate, obtaining funding, that occurs within the scientific community and often outside the community. Science makes plenty of claims (the theory of evolution by natural selection, the theory of gravity, germ theory, etc.). In fact, science is characterized by the claims it makes and the status of those claims within the scientific community. Some claims are borne out over time, some are abandoned. Phlogiston used to be a scientific concept, but it's not one now. So did ether (the proposed medium for light, not the class of chemical compounds). What this underscores is that science is a SOCIAL process as well, and thus subject to influences that affect other social processes.

And as a social process, it has social products. And use of these products parallels the use of the products of religion in the past. In many respects, science is being used in ways, often by nonscientists, in the same way that religion has historically been--as both a political tool and as a explanatory rubric to tell a story about the world we live in. And there often is a gap between the way specialists (priests, theologians, scientists) understand and use the concepts of religion and science and the way non-specialists use them. And unfortunately, scientists themselves have had minimal influence on how science goes on to be used in society.

Let's not be naive about science and scientists. There are beliefs in science. And there is scientific dogma, that gets overturned periodically. Just even a little familiarity with the history of science would make that evident. What has made science different from other social processes is the system of peer review (which is flawed) and its (if sometimes reluctant) openness to revision, when the empirical evidence accumulates, by a wider audience. Simply put, science (the social process) allows there to be more experts in the room (once you jump the hurdles) and allows them to talk to each other more openly. Martin Luther tried doing that with religion in the history of Christianity, but it just didn't quite work out the way he had hoped, I believe. Science as practised today is a great advance in human history, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking it's some pure, cooly rational process that will simply probe the intriguing questions of the day. Anyone who's ever applied for grant funds comes face to face with the social realities of science.
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
But back to the movie.

Geesh. Its just a movie, not a Nova special. And even Nova specials aren't science. That's journalists (and film makers) doing a movie ON science. "What the Bleep" USES science (very poorly) to make a point, which ain't so crazy. How you think might affect how you feel and what you notice in the world. The movie isn't a scientific article or a legal brief. It's logical consistency isn't as germaine to that essential message, in the same way that the logical consistency of a poem or fiction isn't necessarily imperative for the message of those works.

It's been fun. Thanks
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/19/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
"Let's not be naive about science and scientists. There are beliefs in science. "

There are BELIEFS OF SCIENTISTS. Not beliefs in science. That is why I took your tongue in cheek comment about science as religion... and responded. It is a slippery slope.. and as long as people misrepresent or misunderstand how science works... we will never have an informed conversation on the subject... when the religious public pejoratively defines science as a dogma.... it completely alters the true workings and beauty of science as an open, revisionistic model for how to understand our world.

Anyone that forms a group... university scientists worried about funding, CSICOP (committee for scientific inquiry for claims of the paranormal), chemists under pressure to produce FDA approved drugs ahead of schedule...

anytime you for a "camp" or "group" you can form an agenda. I think it is simple, however.. that scientists and rationalists are the most concerned about being open minded and objective.. even if they are not. Religious people often pride themselves in mindless, authoritarian arguments that have no proof or rational basis..

When someone says, "cite your sources," I don't know how accurate the bible is.

It was written 300 years late... by scholars that wrote in the "voice" who they thought would have written it... "OH.. this sounds like Mark"

And Jesus' birthday was what... September 28th?
FYI.. these are christian sites..

http://www.new-life.ne...

http://www.aloha.net/~...
- 49 friends
- 33 reviews
12/19/2006 Padawan T. says:
You missed the point Michael.

Look up the definition of belief. Groups often have beliefs. Indeed, they are sometimes identified by those beliefs. Science (the social process) includes groups of people called scientists. These groups hold beliefs informed by science (the method & collective body of knowledge). These people believe in science.

Slippery slope arguments are often fallacious. And I find it odd that you, of all people in this thread, would find it germaine to mention the bible, Jesus's birthday, and christian websites (thanks, but no thanks) in a thread about the use of science in a metaphysically speculative movie.

I find your faith in science admirable though. Let's find you an altar and you can sacrifice the DVD of the movie on it.
- 324 friends
- 1410 reviews
12/20/2006 Uncle Fishbits Aeneas "My reviews are even more better" X. says:
They confiscated the alter, Droz.
-- PCU